Resurfacing matched to standard total hip arthroplasty by preoperative activity levels: A comparison of postoperative outcomes

Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases

Volumn 67, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 116-119

  Zywiel, Michael G ^a   Marker, David R ^a   McGrath, Mike S ^a   Delanois, Ronald E ^a   Mont, Michael A ^a  

^a SINAI HOSPITAL OF BALTIMORE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; BODY MASS; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HARRIS HIP SCORE; HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCORING SYSTEM; SEX DIFFERENCE; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS;

ADULT; AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; FEMALE; HIP JOINT; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; JOINT DISEASES; MALE; METALS; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 67649476467     PISSN: 19369719     EISSN: 19369727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ulrich SD, et al. Effect of changing indications and techniques on total hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Dec;(465):63-70.
2. Nunley RM, Della Valle CJ, and Barrack RL. Is patient selection important for hip resurfacing? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;(1):56-65.
3. Kim PR, Beaulé PE, Laflamme GY, Dunbar M. Causes of early failure in a multicenter clinical trial of hip resurfacing. J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):44-49
4. Beaulé PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff M, et al. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(418):87-93. (Pubitemid 38140428)
5. Mont MA, Marker DR, Smith JM, et al. Resurfacing is comparable to total hip arthroplasty at short-term follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;(1):66-71.
6. Hing CB, Back DL, Bailey M, et al. 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 Br. 2007;11:1431-1438
7. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;2:167-170
8. Vail TP, Mina CA, Yergler JD, Pietrobon R. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Dec;(453):123-131
9. Naal FD, Maffiuletti NA, Munzinger U, Hersche O. Sports after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2007;5:705-11. (Pubitemid 46956278)
10. Narvani AA, Tsiridis E, Nwaboku HC, Bajekal RA. Sporting activity following Birmingham hip resurfacing. Int J Sports Med. 2006;6:505-507 (Pubitemid 43938533)
11. Pollard TC, Baker RP, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, Bannister GC. 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 Br. 2006;5:592-600.
12. Seyler TM, Etienne G, Plate JF, et al. Use of modular large femoral heads without liners in hip arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int. 2006;15:217-220
13. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;4:737-755
14. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol. 1932;140:1-55.