Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty After Eight Years - a Retrospective Study

Overview

Journal Rev Bras Ortop

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2018 Nov 1

PMID 30377613

Authors

Felipe Spinelli Bessa

Ronald Delgadillo Fuentes

Helder de Souza Miyahara

Alberto Tesconi Croci

Leandro Ejnisman

Jose Ricardo Negreiros Vicente

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of hip resurfacing arthroplasty for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis.

Methods: This study retrospectively assessed 30 patients with hip osteoarthritis who underwent hip resurfacing arthroplasty between 2005 and 2014. Patients of both genders suffering from advanced primary and secondary hip osteoarthritis were included in the study. Data were collected about postoperative complications and the need for revision of the arthroplasty. Antero-posterior pelvis and lateral hip x-rays were performed in order to classify osteolysis according to the Amstutz criteria; the Lequèsne index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and the UCLA activity level questionnaires were answered pre- and postoperatively.

Results: After a mean follow-up of eight years, a statistically significant improvement was observed between the mean of the outcomes of both scores, when compared pre- and postoperatively ( < 0.001). Nevertheless, there was a high incidence of arthroplasty revision (20%), related to the size of the femoral stem and errors in surgical technique.

Conclusion: Using the appropriate technique, hip resurfacing arthroplasty can present good results in well-selected patients.

References

Patel N, Wright J, Sabharwal S, Afsharpad A, Bajekal R . Hip resurfacing arthroplasty at a non-specialist centre. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2014; 96(1):67-72. PMC: 5137647. DOI: 10.1308/003588414X13824511649850. View

Daniel J, Pradhan C, Ziaee H, Pynsent P, McMinn D . Results of Birmingham hip resurfacing at 12 to 15 years: a single-surgeon series. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(10):1298-306. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B10.33695. View

Zahiri C, Schmalzried T, Szuszczewicz E, Amstutz H . Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty. 1999; 13(8):890-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90195-4. View

Hing C, Back D, Bailey M, Young D, Dalziel R, Shimmin A . The results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings at a mean of five years. An independent prospective review of the first 230 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(11):1431-8. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B11.19336. View

Amstutz H, Beaule P, Dorey F, Le Duff M, Campbell P, Gruen T . Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86(1):28-39. View

Marshall D, Pykerman K, Werle J, Lorenzetti D, Wasylak T, Noseworthy T . Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472(7):2217-30. PMC: 4048407. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3556-3. View

Girard J . Hip Resurfacing: International Perspectives: Review Article. HSS J. 2017; 13(1):7-11. PMC: 5264568. DOI: 10.1007/s11420-016-9511-y. View

Lequesne M, Mery C, Samson M, Gerard P . Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Validation--value in comparison with other assessment tests. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl. 1987; 65:85-9. DOI: 10.3109/03009748709102182. View

Marker D, Strimbu K, McGrath M, Zywiel M, Mont M . Resurfacing versus conventional total hip arthroplasty - review of comparative clinical and basic science studies. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009; 67(2):120-7. View

10.

Amanatullah D, Cheung Y, Di Cesare P . Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a review of the evidence for surgical technique, outcome, and complications. Orthop Clin North Am. 2010; 41(2):263-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2010.01.002. View

11.

McLaughlin J, Lee K . Total Hip Arthroplasty With an Uncemented Tapered Femoral Component in Patients Younger Than 50 Years of Age: A Minimum 20-Year Follow-Up Study. J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31(6):1275-1278. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.12.026. View

12.

Treacy R, McBryde C, Pynsent P . Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(2):167-70. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.87b2.15030. View

13.

Beaule P, Dorey F, Le Duff M, LeDuff M, Gruen T, Amstutz H . Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; (418):87-93. View

14.

Shimmin A, Back D . Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87(4):463-4. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B4.15498. View

15.

Jameson S, Mason J, Baker P, Gregg P, Porter M, Deehan D . Have cementless and resurfacing components improved the medium-term results of hip replacement for patients under 60 years of age?. Acta Orthop. 2014; 86(1):7-17. PMC: 4366667. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2014.972256. View

16.

Matharu G, Judge A, Murray D, Pandit H . Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Hip Resurfacing Revision: A Cohort Study Into the Second Decade After the Operation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98(17):1444-52. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.15.01234. View

17.

Dunbar M, Prasad V, Weerts B, Richardson G . Metal-on-metal hip surface replacement: the routine use is not justified. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(11 Supple A):17-21. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34426. View

18.

Marker D, Seyler T, Jinnah R, Delanois R, Ulrich S, Mont M . Femoral neck fractures after metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing: a prospective cohort study. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(7 Suppl 3):66-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.05.017. View