Hip resurfacing with individualized drill templates-comparison between anterolateral and posterior approach

Current Orthopaedic Practice

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 473-475

  Kunz, Manuela ^a   Rudan, John F ^a   Wood, Gavin C A ^a   Ellis, Randy E ^a  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Anterolateral; Hip resurfacing; Posterior; Surgical approach; Template

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ANTEROLATERAL FEMORAL CENTRAL PIN FIXATION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HIP RESURFACING; HIP SURGERY; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALIZED DRILL TEMPLATE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEASUREMENT ERROR; ORTHOPEDIC EQUIPMENT; POSTERIOR FEMORAL CENTRAL PIN FIXATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 84867171287     PISSN: 19407041     EISSN: 19417551     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BCO.0b013e318267f5f9     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Chen S, Marin M, Estabrooks T, et al. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty findings from the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry. Presented at the Annual Meeting. 2009; Canadian Orthopaedic Association. British Columbia, Canada.
2. Technology Evaluation Center. Metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing. BlueCross BlueShield Association. 2007;22:3. Cited from http://www.bcbs.com/ blueresources/tec/vols/22/metal-on-metaltotal-hip.html.
3. Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn P. Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg. 2004;86-B: 177-184. (Pubitemid 38386853)
4. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Hip and Knee Annual Report, 2009. Cited from http://www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/ aoanjrr/documents/aoanjrrrepor.
5. Allison C. Minimally invasive hip resurfacing. Issues Emerg Health Technol. 2005;65:1-4.
6. Simpson JM, Villar RN. Resurfacing registers concern. J Bone Joint Surg. 2010;92-B: 1493-1497.
7. American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons. Minimally invasive and small incision joint replacement surgery: what surgeons should consider. Park Ridge (IL): The Association; 2004. Available: http://www.aahks.org/pdf/MIS- position-statement.pdf.
8. Bailey C, Gul R, Falworth M, et al. Component alignment in hip resurfacing using computer navigation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:917-9122.
9. Kunz M, Rudan JF, Xenoyannis GL, et al. Computer-assisted hip resurfacing using individualized drill templates. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:600-606.
10. McBryde CW, Revell MP, Thomas AM, et al. The influence of surgical approach on outcome in Birmingham hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:920-926.
11. Myers G, Morgan D, McBryde W, et al. Does surgical approach influence component positioning with Birmingham hip resurfacing? Int Orthop. 2009;33:59-63.
12. Steffen R, O'Rourke K, Gill HS, et al. The anterolateral approach leads to less disruption of the femoral neck blood supply than the posterior approach during hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007;89-B: 1293-1298. (Pubitemid 350157308)
13. Khan A, Yates P, Lovering A, et al. The effect of surgical approach on bloodflow to the femoral head during resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg. 2007;89-B: 21-25. (Pubitemid 46218406)