We reviewed the clinical and radiological outcome at a minimum of five years of 140 consecutive metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (HR) arthroplasties in 132 patients. The mean follow-up was 73 months (62 to 105). Revision of either component was defined as failure.
The average Harris hip score (HHS) was 58.6 (25 to 88) preoperatively and 94.4 (60 to 100) at the latest follow-up (p<0.0005). Average University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score was 3.1 (1 to 9) pre-operatively and 6.7 (2 to 10) post-operatively (p<0.0005).
The survival after 6 years was 97.8% overall and 98.5% (excluding a post traumatic femoral neck fracture). These good medium-term results suggest that HR is an effective procedure in young and active patients.
McMinnD., TreacyR., LinK., PynsentP.. Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip: experience of the McMinn prosthesis.Clin Orthop Relat Res1996; 329(suppl): 89–98.
2.
LougheadJ.M., StarksI., ChesneyD., MatthewsJ.N., McCaskieA.W., HollandJ.P.. Removal of acetabular bone in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a comparison with hybrid total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Br2006; 88: 31–4.
3.
KishidaY., SuganoN., NishiiT., MikiH., YamaguchiK., YoshikawaH.. Preservation of the bone mineral density of the femur after surface replacement of the hip.J Bone Joint Surg Br2004; 86: 185–9.
4.
LianY.Y., PeiF.X., YooM.C., ChengJ.Q., FatouC.Y.. Changes of the Bone Mineral Density in Proximal Femur following Total Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty in Osteonecrosis of Femoral Head.J Orthop Res2008; 26: 452–9.
5.
MoonotP., SinghP.J., CroninM.D., KalairajahY.E., KavanaghT.G., FieldR.E.. Birmingham Hip Resurfacing.Is acetabular bone conserved? J Bone Joint Surg Br2008; 90: 319–23.
6.
PollardT.C., BakerR.P., Eastaugh-WaringS.J., BannisterG.C.. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip: a five- to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing.J Bone Joint Surg Br2006; 88: 592–600.
7.
HingC.B., BackD.L., BaileyM., YoungD.A., DalzielR.E., ShimminA.J.. The results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings at a mean of five years: an independent prospective review of the first 230 hips.J Bone Joint Surg Br2007; 89: 1431–8.
8.
TreacyR.B., McBrydeC.W., PynsentP.B.. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a minimum follow-up of five years.J Bone Joint Surg Br2005; 87: 167–70.
9.
Della ValleC.J., NunleyR.M., RatermanS.J., BarrackR.L.. Initial American experience with hip resurfacing following FDA approval.Clin Orthop Relat Res2009; 467: 72–8.
10.
ShimminA.J., BackD.. Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases.J Bone joint Surg Br2005; 87: 463–74.
11.
CosseyA.J., BackD.L., ShimminA., YoungD., SprigginsA.J.. The non operative management of periprosthetic fractures associated with the Birmingham hip resurfacing procedure.J Arthroplasty2005; 20: 358–61.
12.
MoroniA., SavarinoL., CadossiM., BaldiniN., GianniniS.. Does Ion release differ between hip resurfacing and Metal-on-metal THA?Clin Orthop Rel Res2008; 466: 700–7.
13.
HarrisW.H.. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures treated by mold arthroplasty: an end-result study using a new method of result evaluation.J Bone Joint Surg Am1969; 51: 737–55.
14.
AmstutzH.C., ThomasB.J., JinnahR., KimW., GroganT., YaleC.. Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip: a comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Am1984; 66: 228–41.
15.
BrookerA.F., BowermanJ.W., RobinsonR.A., RileyL.H.Jr.. Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement: incidence and a method for classification.J Bone Joint Surg Am1973; 55: 1629–32.
16.
BeauléP.E., DoreyF.J., Le DuffM., GruenT., AmstutzH.C.. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip.Clin Orthop Relat Res2004; 418: 87–93.
17.
HingC.B., YoungD.A., DalzielR.E., BaileyM., BackD.L., ShimminA.J.. Narrowing of the neck in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. A radiological study.J Bone Join Surg Br2007; 89: 1019–24.
18.
DanielJ., PynsentP.B., McMinnD.J.. Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis.J Bone Joint Surg Br2004; 86: 177–84.
19.
HeilpernG.N., ShahN.N., FordyceM.J.. Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty. A series of 110 consecutive hips with a minimum five year clinical and radiological follow-up.J Bone Joint Surg Br2008; 90: 1137–42.
20.
CortenK., MacDonaldS.J.. Hip resurfacing data from National Joint Registries.What do they tell us? What do they not tell us? Clin Orthop Related Res2010; 482: 351–7.
21.
BeauléP.E., CampbellP.A., HokeR., DoreyF.. Notching of the femoral neck during resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a vascular study.J Bone Joint Surg Br2006; 88: 35–9.
22.
ZustinJ., KrauseM., BreerS.. Morphologic analysis of periprosthetic fractures after hip resurfacing arthroplasty.J Bone Join Surg Am2010; 92: 404–10.
23.
KwonY.M., Glyn-JonesS., SimpsonD.J.. Analysis of wear retrieved metal-on-metal hip resurfacing implants revised due to pseudotumors.J Bone Join Surg Br2010; 92: 356–61.
24.
VendittoliP.A., MottardS., RoyA.G., DupontC., LavigneM.. Chromium and Cobalti on release following the Durom high carbon content, forged metal-on-metal surface replacement of the hip.J Bone Join Surg Br2007; 89: 441–8.
25.
DavisE.T., OlsenM., ZderoR., WadellJ.P., SchemitschE.H.. Femoral neck fracture following hip resurfacing: the effect of alignment of the femoral component.J Bone Join Surg Br2008; 90: 1522–7.
26.
MadhuT.S., AkulaM.R., RamanR.N., SharmaH.K., JohnsonV.G.. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Prosthesis. An indipedent single surgeon's experience at 7 year follow-up.Journal of Arthroplasty2010; in press.
27.
LavigneM., TherrienM., NantelJ., RoyA., PrinceF., VendittoliP.A.. The functional outcome of hip resurfacing and large head THA is the same. A randomized double blind study.Clin Orthop Rel Res2010; 468: 326–36.
