Revision rate of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty: Comparison of published literature and arthroplasty register data

International Orthopaedics

Volumn 36, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 1349-1354

  Schuh, Reinhard ^a   Neumann, Daniel ^b   Rauf, Rauend ^c   Hofstaetter, Jochen ^a   Boehler, Nikolaus ^d   Labek, Gerold ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SALZBURG   (Austria)

^c INNSBRUCK MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Austria)

^d KEPLER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASIA; AUSTRALIA; BIRHINGMAN HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EUROPE; HEALTH SERVICE; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; IMPLANT REGISTRY; NATIONAL JOINT ARTHROPLASTY REGISTER; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REPRODUCIBILITY; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; VALIDITY;

ARTHRITIS; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MEDLINE; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; REGISTRIES; REOPERATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84864285197     PISSN: 03412695     EISSN: 14325195     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-012-1502-0     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Ollivere B et al (2010) The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: 5-year clinical and radiographic results from a District General Hospital. Int Orthop 34(5):631-634
2. McMinn DJ et al (2011) Indications and results of hip resurfacing. Int Orthop 35(2):231-237
3. McMinn DJ et al (2008) Results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing dysplasia component in severe acetabular insufficiency: a six- to 9.6-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(6):715-723 (Pubitemid 351859799)
4. Mont MA et al (2006) Hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 14(8):454-463 (Pubitemid 44916635)
5. Labek G, Janda W, Agreiter M, Schuh R, Böhler N (2011) Organisation, data evaluation, interpretation and effect of arthroplasty register data on the outcome in terms of revision rate in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 35(2):157-163, Epub 2010 Oct 5
6. Labek G, Stoica CI, Boehler N (2008) Comparison of information in arthroplasty Registers from different countries. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90-B:288-291 (Pubitemid 351428941)
7. Schuh R et al (2011) Validity of published outcome data concerning Anatomic Graduated Component total knee arthro-plasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty register data. Int Orthop. Apr 13. [Epub ahead of print]
8. Aulakh TS et al (2010) Hip resurfacing and osteonecrosis: results from an independent hip resurfacing register. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130(7):841-845
9. Back D, Dalziel R, Young D, Shimmin A (2004) Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings. An independent prospective study of the first 230 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87(3):324-329
10. Baker RP et al (2011) A medium-term comparison of hybrid hip replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing in active young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(2):158-163
11. Bose VC, Baruah BD (2010) Resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip for avascular necrosis of the femoral head: a minimum follow-up of four years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(7):922-928
12. Carrothers AD et al (2010) Birmingham hip resurfacing: the prevalence of failure. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(10):1344-1350
13. Cooke NJ et al (2009) Bone density of the femoral neck following Birmingham hip resurfacing. Acta Orthop 80(6):660-665
14. Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJ (2004) Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(2):177-184 (Pubitemid 38386853)
15. De Smet K (2005) Belgium experience with metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 36(2):203-213
16. Giannini S (2007) Hip resurfacing mid term results of the last generation metal-on-metal devices. J Orthop Traumatol 8:202-206
17. Heilpern GN, Shah NN, Fordyce MJ (2008) 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 90(9):1137-1142
18. Hing C, Back D, Shimmin A (2007) Hip resurfacing: indications, results, and conclusions. Instr Course Lect 56:171-178
19. Khan M et al (2009) Birmingham hip arthroplasty: five to eight years of prospective multicenter results. J Arthroplasty 24(7):1044-1050
20. Langton DJ et al (2011) Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(2):164-171
21. Madhu TS et al (2011) The Birmingham hip resurfacing prosthesis: an independent single surgeon's experience at 7-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 26(1):1-8
22. Marulanda GA et al (2008) Early clinical experience with the use of the Birmingham hip resurfacing system. Orthopedics 31(12 Suppl 2)
23. McAndrew AR et al (2007) A district general hospital's experience of hip resurfacing. Hip Int 17(1):1-3 (Pubitemid 46824565)
24. McBryde CW et al (2008) Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in developmental dysplasia: a case-control study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(6):708-714 (Pubitemid 351859798)
25. McBryde CW et al (2010) The influence of head size and sex on the outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(1):105-112
26. Nishii T et al (2007) Five-year results of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty in Asian patients. J Arthroplasty 22(2):176-183 (Pubitemid 46162084)
27. Ollivere B et al (2009) Early clinical failure of the Birmingham metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is associated with metallosis and soft-tissue necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91(8):1025-1030
28. Pollard TC et al (2006) 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 88(5):592-600
29. Reito A, Puolakka T, Pajamaki J (2010) Birmingham hip resurfacing: Five to eight year results. Int Orthop 35(8):1119-1124
30. Steffen RT et al (2008) The five-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty: an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(4):436-441 (Pubitemid 351542858)
31. Swank ML, Alkire MR (2009) Minimally invasive hip resurfacing compared to minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 67(2):113-115
32. Treacy R, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB (2005) Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(2):177-184
33. Treacy RB et al (2011) Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(1):27-33
34. Witzleb WC et al (2009) In vivo wear rate of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty. A review of 10 retrieved components. J Arthroplasty 24(6):951-956
35. Mcbryde C, Revell MP, Thomas AM, Treacy RB, Pysent PB (2008) The Influence of Surgical Approach on Outcome im BHR. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:920-926
36. Malek I, Hashmi M, Holland JP (2010) Socio economic impact of Birmingham hip resurfacing on patient employment after ten years. Int Orthop. Epub ahead of print (Nov. 27)
37. Doll R, Hill AB (1956) Lung cancer and other causes of death in relation to smoking. A second report on the mortality of Brithish doctors. BMJ 10(5001):1071-1081
38. Lilienfeld A, Lilienfeld DE (1980) Foundations of epidemiology, second edition. Oxford Univ. Press, p. 245
39. Australian Orthopaedic Association (2010) Hip and knee arthroplasty annual report. Joint Repplacement Registry
40. New Zealand Orthopaedic Association (2009) Annual report. New Zealand Joint Arthroplasty Register
41. Danish Hip Arthroplasty,Register (2009) Annual report http://www.dhr.dk/ENGLISH.htm
42. Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register (2009) Annual report. http://www.knee.dk, 2009
43. Vail TP (2004) Hip resurfacing. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 19 (4):236-244
44. McGrory B et al (2010) Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 18(5):306-314
45. Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register (2008) Annual report. http://www.jru.orthop.gu.se
46. Labek G et al (2009) High failure rate of the Duraloc Constrained Inlay. Acta Orthop 80(5):545-547
47. Labek G et al (2011) Outcome of the cementless Taperloc stem: a comprehensive literature review including arthroplasty register data. Acta Orthop 82(2):143-148
48. Labek G et al (2011) Outcome and reproducibility of data concerning the Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a structured literature review including arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop 82(2):131-135
49. Labek G, Stoica CI, Bohler N (2008) Comparison of the information in arthroplasty registers from different countries. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(3):288-291 (Pubitemid 351428941)
50. Labek G et al (2011) Revision rates after total ankle arthroplasty in sample-based clinical studies and national registries. Foot Ankle Int 32(8):740-745