Total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of patients with arthritis of the hip joint: Single centre, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 344, Issue 7855, 2012, Pages

  Costa, Matthew L ^a   Achten, Juul ^a   Parsons, Nicholas R ^a   Edlin, Richard P ^b   Foguet, Pedro ^c   Prakash, Udai ^c   Griffin, Damian R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

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

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COXITIS; DISABILITY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HARRIS HIP SCORE; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OXFORD HIP SCORE; PARALLEL DESIGN; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; TEACHING HOSPITAL; THROMBOEMBOLISM; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; UNITED KINGDOM; AGED; ARTHRITIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; FEMUR HEAD; FEMUR NECK; HIP; HOSPITALIZATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY;

AGED; ARTHRITIS; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FEMUR HEAD; FEMUR NECK; HIP JOINT; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD;

EID: 84860634749     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e2147     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Murray DW, Carr AJ, Bulstrode CJ. Which primary total hip replacement? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995;77:520-7.
2. Wroblewski BM, Fleming PA, Siney PD. Charnley low-frictional torque arthroplasty of the hip. 20-to-30 year results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999;81:427-30. (Pubitemid 29245894)
3. Digas G, Karrholm J, Thanner J, Malchau H, Herberts P. The Otto Aufranc Award. Highly cross-linked polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: randomized evaluation of penetration rate in cemented and uncemented sockets using radiostereometric analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;429:6-16. (Pubitemid 39579186)
4. Grigoris P, Roberts P, Panousis K, Jin Z. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: the evolution of contemporary designs. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2006;220:95-105.
5. Australian National Joint Replacement Registry. Demographics of hip and knee arthroplasty. 2010. www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/documents/ aoanjrrreport-2010.pdf.
6. Cuckler JM. The optimal metal-metal arthroplasty is still a total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 2006;21:74-6. (Pubitemid 43870322)
7. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87:167-70. (Pubitemid 40282567)
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. Lingard EA, Muthumayandi K, Holland JP. Comparison of patient-reported outcomes between hip resurfacing and total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:1550-4.
10. 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;453:123-31. (Pubitemid 44900970)
11. Achten J, Parsons NR, Edlin RP, Griffin DR, Costa ML. A randomised controlled trial of total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of young patients with arthritis of the hip joint. BMC Musculoskeletal Dis 2010;11:8.
12. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:185-90. (Pubitemid 26096988)
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;51:737-55.
14. Soderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001:189-97. (Pubitemid 33599782)
15. Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties - a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:1037-41. (Pubitemid 41820991)
16. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37:53-72. (Pubitemid 26191458)
17. Salen BA, Spangfort EV, Nygren AL, Nordemar R. The Disability Rating Index: an instrument for the assessment of disability in clinical settings. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:1423-35.
18. Paffenbarger R, Wing A, Hyde RT. Physical activity as an index of heart attack risk in college alumni. Am J Epidemiol 1978;108:161-75. (Pubitemid 9167225)
19. Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Carr AJ, et al. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:1010-4. (Pubitemid 47492792)
20. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 1979;6:65-70.
21. 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;87:163-6. (Pubitemid 40278013)
22. 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;88:997-1002.
23. Garbuz DS, Tanzer M, Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The John Charnley Award: metal-on-metal hip resurfacing versus large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:318-25.
24. 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, double-blind study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:326-36.
25. Vendittoli PA, Roy A, Mottard S, Girard J, Lusignan D, Lavigne M. Metal ion release from bearing wear and corrosion with 28 mm and large-diameter metal-on-metal bearing articulations: a follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:12-9.
26. Skinner J, Kay P. Commentary: metal on metal hips. BMJ 2011;342:d3009.
27. National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Prostheses used in hip, knee and ankle replacement procedures. 2010. www.njrcentre.org.uk/NjrCentre/ LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=lgUspxM82lk%3d&tabid=86&mid=523.
28. Smith SL, Dowson D, Goldsmith AA. The effect of femoral head diameter upon lubrication and wear of metal-on-metal total hip replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 2001;215:161-70. (Pubitemid 34459332)
29. Wilmshurst P. The regulation of medical devices. BMJ 2011;342:d2822.
30. Australian Orthopaedic Association. Annual report hip and knee replacement. 2011. www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/documents/AnnualReports2011/ Lay-Summary-2011.pdf.
31. Marchetti P, Binazzi R, Vaccari V, Girolami M, Morici F, Impallomeni C, et al. Long-term results with cementless Fitek (or Fitmore) cups. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:730-7.
32. Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties - a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:1037-41. (Pubitemid 41820991)