Gait Symmetry. A Comparison of Hip Resurfacing and Jumbo Head Total Hip Arthroplasty Patients

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 680-685

  Queen, Robin M ^a   Watters, Tyler Steven ^a   Abbey, Alicia N ^a   Sabesan, Vani J ^a   Vail, Thomas Parker ^b   Bolognesi, Michael P ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Gait analysis; Gait symmetry; Hip resurfacing arthroplasty; Metal on metal; Total hip arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FLEXOR REFLEX; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; GAIT; HEEL; HIP; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KINEMATICS; LARGE DIAMETER FEMORAL HEAD TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY; LIMB MOVEMENT; MALE; MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; OPERATION DURATION; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS;

AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; BIOMECHANICS; FEMALE; FEMUR HEAD; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GAIT; HIP JOINT; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79960440959     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.07.022     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Kurtz S., Mowat F., Ong K., et al. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 to 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:1487.
2. Crowninshield R.D., Rosenberg A.G., Sporer S.M. Changing demographics of patients with total joint replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006, 443:266.
3. Liu S.S., Della Valle A.G., Besculides M.C., et al. Trends in mortality, complications, and demographics for primary hip arthroplasty in the United States. Int Orthop 2009, 33:643.
4. Berry D.J., Harmsen W.S., Cabanela M.E., et al. Twenty-five-year survivorship of two thousand consecutive primary Charnley total hip replacements: factors affecting survivorship of acetabular and femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002, 84:171.
5. Callaghan J.J., Albright J.C., Goetz D.D., et al. Charnley total hip arthroplasty with cement: minimum twenty-five-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000, 82:487.
6. Maloney W.J., Galante J.O., Anderson M., et al. Fixation, polyethylene wear, and pelvic osteolysis in primary total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999, 369:157.
7. Harris W.H. Wear and periprosthetic osteolysis: the problem. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 393:66.
8. Schmalzreid T.P., Peters P.C., Maurer B.T., et al. Long-duration metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasties with low wear of the articulating surfaces. J Arthroplasty 1996, 11:322.
9. Muller M.E. The benefits of metal-on-metal total hip replacements. Clin Orthop 1995, 311:54.
10. Saito S., Ryu J., Watanabe M., et al. Midterm results of Metasul metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006, 21:1105.
11. Grübl A., Marker M., Brodner W., et al. Long-term follow-up of metal-on-metal total hip replacement. J Orthop Res 2007, 25:841.
12. Delaunay C.P., Bonnomet F., Clavert P., et al. Total hip arthroplasty using metal-on-metal articulation in active patients younger than 50 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008, 466:340.
13. Neumann D.R., Thaler C., Hitzl W., et al. Long-term results of a contemporary metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009, [Epub ahead of print].
14. Cuckler J.M., Moore K.D., Lombardi A.V., et al. Large versus small femoral heads in metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2004, 19:41.
15. Peters C.L., McPherson E., Jackson J.D., et al. Reduction in early dislocation rate with large-diameter femoral heads in primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22:140.
16. Smith T.M., Berend K.R., Lombardi A.V., et al. Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty with large heads may prevent early dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 441:137.
17. Khan M., Kuiper J.H., Edwards D., et al. Birmingham hip arthroplasty: five to eight years of prospective multicenter results. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24:1044.
18. Amstutz H.C., Le Duff M.J. Eleven years of experience with metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing: a review of 1000 conserve plus. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23:36.
19. Daniel J., Pynsent P.B., McMinn D.J. Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004, 86:177.
20. Hing C., Back D., Shimmin A. Hip resurfacing: indications, results, and conclusions. Instr Course Lect 2007, 56:171.
21. Shimmin A., Beaulé P.E., Campbell P. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008, 90:637.
22. Mont M.A., Ragland P.S., Etienne G., et al. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006, 14:454.
23. Andersson L., Wesslau A., Boden H., et al. Immediate or late weight bearing after uncemented total hip arthroplasty: a study of functional recovery. J Arthroplasty 2001, 16:1063.
24. Bennett D., Humphreys L., O'Brien S., et al. Gait kinematics of age-stratified hip replacement patients-a large scale, long-term follow-up study. Gait Posture 2008, 28:194.
25. Isobe Y., Okuno M., Otsuki T., et al. Clinical study on arthroplasties for osteoarthritic hip by quantitative gait analysis: comparison between total hip arthroplasty and bipolar endoprosthetic arthroplasty. Bio Med Mater Eng 1998, 8:167.
26. Tanaka R., Shigematsu M., Motooka T., et al. Factors influencing the improvement of gait ability after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009, [Epub ahead of print].
27. McCrory J.L., White S.C., Lifeso R.M. Vertical ground reaction forces: objective measures of gait following hip arthroplasty. Gait Posture 2001, 14:104.
28. Shrader M.W., Bhowmik-Stoker M., Jacofsky M.C., et al. Gait and stair function in total and resurfacing hip arthroplasty: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467:1476.
29. Mont M.A., Seyler T.M., Ragland P.S., et al. Gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007, 22:100.
30. Zhou Y., Guo S., Liu Q., et al. Influence of the femoral head size on early postoperative gait restoration after total hip arthroplasty. Chin Med J 2009, 122:1513.
31. Ferber R., McClay Davis I., Williams D.S., et al. A comparison of within- and between-day reliability of discrete 3D lower extremity variables in runners. J Orthop Res 2002, 20:1139.
32. Yu B., Queen R.M., Schrodt L.A. Effect of external marker sets on between-day reproducibility of knee kinematics and kinetics in stair climbing and level walking. Res Sports Med 2003, 11:209.
33. Foucher K.C., Hurwitz D.E., Wimmer M.A. Preoperative gait adaptations persist one year after surgery in clinically well-functioning total hip replacement patients. J Biomech 2007, 40:3432.
34. Skinner H.B. Pathokinesiology and total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993, 288:78.
35. Long W.T., Dorr L.D., Healy B., et al. Functional recovery of noncemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993, 288:73.
36. Greenwald A.S., Nelson C.L. Biomechanics of the reconstructed hip. Orthop Clin North Am 1973, 4:435.
37. Sutherland A.G., D'Arcy S., Smart D., et al. Abductor weakness and stresses around the acetabular components of total hip arthroplasty: a finite element analysis. Int Orthop 1999, 23:275.
38. Delp S.L., Wixson R.L., Komattu A.V., et al. How superior placement of the joint center in hip arthroplasty affects the abductor muscles. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996, 328:137.
39. Rösler J., Perka C. The effect of anatomical positional relationships on kinetic parameters after total hip replacement. Int Orthop 2000, 24:23.
40. Ritter M.A., Harty L.D., Keating M.E., et al. A clinical comparison of the anterolateral and posterolateral approaches to the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001, 385:95.
41. Masonis J.L., Bourne R.B. Surgical approach, abductor function, and total hip arthroplasty dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002, 405:46.
42. Gore D.R., Murray M.P., Sepic S.B., et al. Anterolateral compared to posterior approach in the total hip arthroplasty: differences in component positioning, hip strength, and hip motion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982, 165:180.
43. Jolles B.M., Bogoch E.R. Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004, 1:CD003828.
44. Whatling G.M., Dabke H.V., Holt C.A., et al. Objective functional assessment of total hip arthroplasty following two common surgical approaches: the posterior and direct lateral approaches. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2008, 222:897.
45. Madsen M.S., Ritter M.A., Morris H.H., et al. The effect of total hip arthroplasty surgical approach on gait. J Orthop Res 2004, 22:44.
46. Meneghini R.M., Smits S.A., Swinford R.R., et al. A randomized, prospective study of 3 minimally invasive surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty: comprehensive gait analysis. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23(Suppl):68.
47. Boardman DL, Dorey F., Thomas B.J., et al. The accuracy of assessing total hip arthroplasty outcomes: a prospective correlation study of walking ability and 2 validated measurement devices. J Arthroplasty 2000, 15:200.