» Articles » PMID: 20730585

Bone Mineral Density in the Femoral Neck Increases After Hip Resurfacing: a Cohort with Five-year Follow-up

Overview
Journal Int Orthop
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2010 Aug 24
PMID 20730585
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Hip resurfacing is an effective treatment modality for arthritis of the hip in carefully selected patients; however, its use remains controversial due to its higher revision rates compared with conventional total hip replacement surgery. The most frequent reason for revision is femoral neck fracture, and preoperative bone mineral density is an important factor when considering the option of hip resurfacing. Whilst reduction in bone mineral density following total hip replacement is well documented, little is known about the long-term changes in femoral neck bone mineral density after hip resurfacing. We followed 15 patients (ten male and five female) who underwent unilateral hip resurfacing for osteoarthritis with standardised dual energy X-ray absorbiometry scans at two weeks, three months, one year, two years and five years postoperatively to determine changes in the femoral neck bone mineral density. Both males and females initially had decreases in bone mineral density at three months postoperatively, but had gradual mean increases to 119% of their initial measurements by five years. This study demonstrates that femoral neck bone mineral density increases after hip resurfacing and that this increase continues for at least five years.

Citing Articles

Prediction of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Adaptation in Pelvis-Femur Model with Hip Arthroplasties.

Abdullah A, Todo M J Funct Biomater. 2021; 12(3).

PMID: 34564198 PMC: 8482249. DOI: 10.3390/jfb12030049.


What should I expect from my recalled Adept Hip Resurfacing?.

Cadossi M, Terrando S, Sambri A, Tedesco G, Mazzotti A, Bordini B Musculoskelet Surg. 2017; 101(3):249-254.

PMID: 28452042 DOI: 10.1007/s12306-017-0476-x.


Is the increase in bone mineral density after hip resurfacing uniform across the femoral neck?.

Kancherla R, Kannan A, Malhotra R Int Orthop. 2011; 36(4):901.

PMID: 22086190 PMC: 3311815. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-011-1406-4.

References
1.
Morlock M, 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. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00621. View

2.
Griffith J, Engelke K, Genant H . Looking beyond bone mineral density : Imaging assessment of bone quality. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010; 1192:45-56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05378.x. View

3.
Beaule P, Le Duff M, Campbell P, Dorey F, Park S, Amstutz H . Metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty with a cemented femoral component: a 7-10 year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2004; 19(8 Suppl 3):17-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.09.004. View

4.
Joseph J, Mullen M, McAuley A, Pillai A . Femoral neck resorption following hybrid metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a radiological and biomechanical analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010; 130(12):1433-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-010-1070-y. View

5.
Moonot P, Singh P, Cronin M, Kalairajah Y, Kavanagh T, Field R . Birmingham hip resurfacing: is acetabular bone conserved?. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008; 90(3):319-23. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B3.18803. View