Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with uncemented fixation of the femoral component. A minimum 2 year follow up

HIP International

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 475-478

  Hull, Peter ^a   Baxter, Jonathan A ^b   Lewis, Charlie ^a   Kordas, Geza ^a   Foguet, Pedro ^a   Prakash, Udai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS COVENTRY AND WARWICKSHIRE NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b HOPE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Functional outcome; Hip resurfacing; Metal on metal; Survivorship; Uncemented

Indexed keywords

BONE CEMENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; FEMALE; FEMUR; FOLLOW UP; FRACTURE FIXATION; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METAL ON METAL HIP RESURFACING; OXFORD HIP SCORE; REOPERATION; SCORING SYSTEM; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; CEMENTATION; FEMALE; FEMUR; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEALTH STATUS; HIP JOINT; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION;

EID: 79960980514     PISSN: 11207000     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5301/HIP.2011.8513     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ. Eleven years of experience with metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing: a review of 1000 conserve plus. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23 (suppl 1): 36-43.
2. McGrath MS, Marker DR, Seyler TM, Ulrich SD, Mont MA. Surface replacement is comparable to primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 94-100.
3. Khan M, Kuiper JH, Edwards D, Robinson E, Richardson JB. Birmingham hip arthroplasty: five to eight years of prospective multicenter results. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24: 1044-50.
4. Heilpern GN, Shah NN, Fordyce MJ. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a series of 110 consecutive hips with a minimum five-year clinical and radiological follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90: 1137-42.
5. Lavigne M, Therrien M, Nantel J, Roy A, Prince F, Vendittoli PA. The John Charnley Award: The functional outcome of hip resurfacing and large-head THA is the same: a randomized, doubleblind study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 468: 326-36.
6. McBryde CW, Theivendran K, Thomas AM, Treacy RB, Pynsent PB. The influence of head size and sex on the outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92: 105-12.
7. Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Starr R, Erhart J, Bhave A. Gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22: 100-8.
8. 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; 88: 592-600.
9. Mont MA, McGrath MS, Ulrich SD, Seyler TM, Marker DR, Delanois RE. Metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing arthroplasty in the presence of extra-articular deformities or implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (suppl 3): 45-51.
10. Ball ST, Le Duff MJ, Amstutz HC. Early results of conversion of a failed femoral component in hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89: 735-41.
11. Langton DJ, Joyce TJ, Jameson SS, et al. Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93: 164-71.
12. Steffen RT, Athanasou NA, Gill HS, Murray DW. Avascular necrosis associated with fracture of the femoral neck after hip resurfacing: histological assessment of femoral bone from retrieval specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92: 787-93.
13. Scheerlinck T, Delport H, Kiewitt T. Influence of the cementing technique on the cement mantle in hip resurfacing: an in vitro computed tomography scan-based analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92: 375-87.
14. Beaulé PE, Campbell P, Lu Z, et al. Vascularity of the arthritic femoral head and hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (suppl 4): 85-96.
15. Little CP, Ruiz AL, Harding IJ, et al. Osteonecrosis in retrieved femoral heads after failed resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 320-3.
16. Wagner M, Wagner H. Preliminary results of uncemented metal on metal stemmed and resurfacing hip replacement arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; 329 (suppl): S78-88.
17. McMinn D, Treacy R, Lin K, Pynsent P. Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip. Experience of the McMinn prothesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; 329 (suppl): S89-98.
18. Lilikakis AK, Vowler SL, Villar RN. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral implant in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasty: minimum of two years follow-up. Orthop Clin North Am 2005; 36: 215-22.
19. Gross TP, Liu F. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with an uncemented femoral component. A seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (suppl 3): 32-7.
20. Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E, Ganz K, Krugel N, Berlemann U. Surgical dislocation of the adult hip a technique with full access to the femoral head and acetabulum without the risk of avascular necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83: 1119-24.
21. Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJ. Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86: 177-84.
22. Corten K, MacDonald SJ. Hip resurfacing data from national joint registries: what do they tell us? What do they not tell us? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468: 351-7.
23. Morlock MM, Bishop N, Zustin J, Hahn M, Ruther W, Amling M. Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (suppl 3): 89-95.
24. Steffen RT, Pandit HP, Palan J, et al. The five-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty: an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90: 436-41.
25. Katrana P, Crawford JR, Vowler S, Lilikakis A, Villar RN. Femoral neck resorption after hip resurfacing arthroplasty-a comparison of cemented and uncemented prosthesis (abstract). J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88 (supp II): 234.