Are leg length and hip offset comparable after hip resurfacing and cementless total hip arthroplasty?

Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England

Volumn 93, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 465-469

  Patel, S ^a   Thakrar, R R ^b   Bhamra, J ^c   Hossain, F ^d   Tengrootenhuysen, M ^a   Haddad, F S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL NATIONAL ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d HULL ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Arthroplasty; Biomechanics; Hip; Leg length inequality; Replacement

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; FEMUR; HIP; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; JOINT INSTABILITY; LEG LENGTH INEQUALITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; FEMALE; FEMUR; HIP JOINT; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; JOINT INSTABILITY; LEG LENGTH INEQUALITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 80052604852     PISSN: 00358843     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1308/003588411X586731     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. National Joint Registry. 7th Annual Report 2010. Hemel Hempstead: NJR; 2010.
2. Goldsmith AA, Dowson D, Isaac GH, Lancaster JG. A comparative joint simulator study of the wear of metal-on-metal and alternative material combinations in hip replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2000; 214: 39-47.
3. Su EP, Sheehan M, Su SL. Comparison of bone removed during total hip arthroplasty with a resurfacing or conventional femoral component: a cadaveric study. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25: 325-329.
4. 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: 735-741.
5. 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.
6. Asayama I, Naito M, Fujisawa M, Kambe T. Relationship between radiographic measurements of reconstructed hip joint position and the Trendelenburg sign. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17: 747-751.
7. Kiyama T, Naito M, Shinoda T, Maeyama A. Hip abductor strengths after total hip arthroplasty via the lateral and posterolateral approaches. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25: 76-80.
8. Little NJ, Busch CA, Gallagher JA et al. Acetabular polyethylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 2,895-2,900.
9. Clark CR, Huddleston HD, Schoch EP 3rd, Thomas BJ. Leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006; 14: 38-45.
10. Tanaka R, Shigematsu M, Motooka T et al. Factors influencing the improvement of gait ability after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25: 982-985.
11. Hofmann AA, Skrzynski MC. Leg-length inequality and nerve palsy in total hip arthroplasty: a lawyer awaits! Orthopedics 2000; 23: 943-944.
12. Silva M, Lee KH, Heisel C et al. The biomechanical results of total hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86: 40-46.
13. Loughead JM, Chesney D, Holland JP, McCaskie AW. Comparison of offset in Birmingham hip resurfacing and hybrid total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 163-166.
14. Girard J, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA, Roy AG. Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88: 721-726.
15. Robb C, Harris R, O'Dwyer K, Aslam N. Radiographic assessment of biomechanical parameters following hip resurfacing and cemented total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 2009; 19: 251-256.
16. Ahmad R, Gillespie G, Annamalai S et al. Leg length and offset following hip resurfacing and hip replacement. Hip Int 2009; 19: 136-140.
17. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 1957; 16: 494-502.
18. Woolson ST, Hartford JM, Sawyer A. Results of a method of leg-length equalization for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14: 159-164.
19. Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF. Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17: 282-288.
20. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174.
21. de Smet KA, Pattyn C, Verdonk R. Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacing using a hybrid metal-on-metal couple. Hip Int 2002; 12: 158-162.
22. Loughead JM, Starks I, Chesney D et al. Removal of acetabular bone in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a comparison with hybrid total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88: 31-34.
23. Vendittoli PA, Lavigne M, Girard J, Roy AG. A randomised study comparing resection of acetabular bone at resurfacing and total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88: 997-1,002.
24. Moonot P, Singh PJ, Cronin MD et al. Birmingham hip resurfacing: is acetabular bone conserved? J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90: 319-323.
25. Ollivere B, Darrah C, Barker T et al. Early clinical failure of the Birmingham metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is associated with metallosis and soft-tissue necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91: 1,025-1,030.
26. De Haan R, Pattyn C, Gill HS et al. Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90: 1,291-1,297.