I think that there are differences related to spread. Obviously both techniques are effective for THA. But 15mg isobaric bupivicaine will not creep up as much as 15 mg hyperbaric bupivicaine. (Lower thoracic dermatomes vs mid-upper thoracic dermatomes). Patients with a block that extend higher will have more of a sympathectomy and more sensory input. IMO that is why blood pressures tend to trend higher with isobarics, and they require more sedation.
I'm aware of how hyperbaric mixtures spread when placed supine or lateral. What I'm pointing out is that my anecdotal experience is that despite seemingly surgical anesthetic levels where needed, little old patients are slightly more likely to wiggle and require IV narcotics during hips when I used isobaric 0.5% 15 mg compared to hyperbaric 0.75% 11.25 mg.
I just think the block is seemingly slightly "less dense" with isobaric. I can't explain why. It just seems to work out that way. And I'm not talking failures of spinals having to convert. Just the difference of a patient needing a little fentanyl IV for comfort and the other one not needing it.