Risk Factors Affecting Outcome of Metal-on-Metal Surface Arthroplasty of the Hip:

Long-term results of hemi-resurfacing and metal-on-metal hip resurfacing for osteonecrosis of the femoral head

PURPOSE

Hemi-resurfacing arthroplasty (Hemi) and metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HR) were proposed as alternatives to conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). Long-term results were evaluated.

METHODS

Twenty-three hips with ONFH were treated, using Hemi in 12 and HR in 11. Mean follow-up was 15 years in the Hemi group and 10 years in the HR group. Long-term outcomes were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

In the Hemi group, 8 hips showed acetabular protrusion and were revised to THA. One of the 8 hips showed femoral loosening. In the HR group, pseudotumor was detected in 4 hips (36%), and 1 hip was revised due to symptomatic pseudotumor. No evidence of any femoral or acetabular loosening was seen in the HR group. Ten-year survival rates were 64.2% and 90.9% in the Hemi and HR groups, respectively. Survival rate in the Hemi group dropped to 22.9% at 15 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term results of Hemi for patients with ONFH were very poor, and Hemi should not continue to be used. Although HR had a concern of pseudotumor, it could offer attractive indications for 10 years.

Outcomes of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Based on Clinical Aspects and Retrieval Analysis of Failed Prosthesis

This research aims to identify the prevalence of failure for Birmingham Hip Prosthesis (BHR) in total hip arthroplasty and to analyze its reasons from biomaterials and biofunctional perspectives. We present our current analysis and tests on a series of different BHR-retrieved prostheses after premature failure. Relevant clinical data, such as X-ray investigations and intraoperative images for clinical case studies, were analyzed to better understand all factors involved in BHR prosthesis failure. A detailed analysis of the failures highlighted uneven cement distribution, overloading in certain areas, and void formation in the material. A closer investigation using microscopical techniques revealed the presence of a crack originating from the gap between the cement mantle and human bone. Additionally, scanning electron microscopy analyses were conducted as part of the investigation to examine bone cement morphology in detail and better understand the interactions at the interfaces between implant, cement, and bone. In conclusion, this research emphasizes the importance of surgical technique planning and the cementation procedure in the success rate of BHR prostheses. It also underscores the need to carefully evaluate patient characteristics and bone quality to minimize the risk of BHR prosthesis failure. The cementation procedure seems to be essential for the long-term functionality of the BHR prosthesis.

Outcome of hip resurfacing revision through the Hueter-anterior approach

BACKGROUND

The Hueter-Anterior Approach (HAA) with its limited soft tissue and internervous dissection has been shown to be an effective approach for primary total hip and hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients requiring revision of HRA to total hip replacement using the HAA, assessing function and complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained research database. Between 2006 and 2015, 555 primary metal-on-metal (MoM) HRAs were performed via the HAA; we identified 33 hips in 30 patients that required revisions for aseptic causes to THA: aseptic loosening of acetabulum in 12 and femoral in 7, 10 for pseudotumour/ALTR, 4 for femoral neck fracture. All revision surgeries were performed through a HAA by a single surgeon who had also performed the index operation. PROMs were collected preoperatively and yearly at various timepoints postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean age at time of revision was 48.9 years (±5.3 SD) for 22 males (67%) and 11 females (33%). The mean time to revision surgery/failure of hip resurfacing was 3.3 years (±2.4 SD). There were 5 major reoperations with 3 infections, 1 acetabular loosening and 1 trunnionosis. There were significant improvements in multiple PROMs.

CONCLUSIONS

The HAA is a viable surgical approach for revision of HRA with smaller initial HRA acetabular components generally requiring a relatively larger acetabular compoent at time of revision. Patients reported improvement in symptoms and function and a lower risk of subsequent reoperation than what has previously been reported for failed MoM bearings.

Hip resurfacing for small-sized osteonecrosis: 73 cases at a median 8years' follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Total hip resurfacing arthroplasty (THRA) is an alternative to conventional total hip replacement (THR) in young patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Series have been small, without criteria regarding extent of necrosis, thus vitiating results. We therefore conducted a retrospective assessment of THRA for small necrosis, to determine (1) implant survival, (2) functional scores, and (3) systemic chromium, cobalt and titanium ion concentrations.

HYPOTHESIS

The study hypothesis was that the revision rate is low, meeting the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criterion of<0.5% revision per year.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A single-center single-surgeon retrospective study included 62 patients, for 73 RTHAs, with a mean age of 45.6years (range: 23-68years) presenting Ficat stage 3 or 4 osteonecrosis of the femoral head with<330° total Kerboul angle (frontal+lateral angles) on simple preoperative X-ray. Study data comprised implant survival and preoperative and last follow-up functional scores (Postel-Merle-d'Aubigné, Oxford-12, Harris, and Devane) and titanium, chromium and cobalt blood concentrations. Necrosis size was assessed on preoperative Kerboul angle.

RESULTS

At a median 8years' follow-up (IQR: 5.9-9.3years), implant survival was 98.6% (95% CI: 97.22-99.98%). Only 1 implant was exchanged, for femoral loosening. Three other patients underwent revision surgery: 2 cases of lavage for infection, and 1 muscle hernia repair. Postel-Merle-d'Aubigné, Oxford-12 and Harris functional scores and Devane activity scores were significantly improved at follow-up, by a median +5 (IQR: 5 to 7), -26 (IQR: -29 to -23), +55 (IQR: 49 to 61) and +1 (IQR: 1 to 2), respectively (all p<0.001). Ion concentrations at last follow-up for titanium, chromium and cobalt were respectively 4.0μg/L (range: 3.6-4.1), 1.1μg/L (range: 0.8-1.9) and 1.1μg/L (range: 0.6-1.8).

CONCLUSION

THRA is a useful option in the long-term for young patients with osteonecrosis with Kerboul angle<330°.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Hueter Anterior Approach for Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: 555 Cases at a Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Purpose of this study was to determine implant survivorship and resultant outcomes, including modes of failure, for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing through the Hueter anterior approach (HAA).

METHODS

Retrospective review of cases from 2006 to 2015, resulted in 555 metal-on-metal hip resurfacing via HAA, mean age 49.4 ± 6.9 years and mean BMI 28.1 ± 5.3. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to assess implant survivorship. Evaluation of technique was based on radiographic assessment of component position at 6 weeks. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed using 12-Item Short Form Survey 12, University of California Los Angeles activity, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and hip disability osteoarthritis outcome scores.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 9.18 years, survivorship was 95.0% at 5 years (95% CI: 93.2-96.8 years) and 92.5% at 10 years (95% CI: 90.0-95.0 years); men at 96.1% (95% CI: 94.3-97.9) and 93.8% (95% CI: 91.1-96.5), and women at 88.8% (95% CI: 81.9-95.7) and 85.6% (95% CI: 77.6-93.6), 5 and 10 years, respectively (P = .033). There were 37 revisions to total hips (7%) at a mean time of 3.3 years (SD 2.7). Indications for revision were aseptic loosening of acetabular (n = 12) and femoral component (n = 7) and pseudotumor (n = 6). Radiographic parameters were respectable and consistent, median acetabular inclination angle 41.2° and femoral stem shaft angle 137.7°. Patient-reported outcome measure scores significantly improved and remained stable at 2 and 5 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Although choice of surgical approach should always be based on surgeon's technical expertise, this study has shown that HAA is safe and effective for hip resurfacing. Mindful attention to long-term metal ion exposure must still be considered.

Results of the First U.S. FDA-Approved Hip Resurfacing Device at 10-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) system is a metal-on-metal hip implant system approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2006. The approval required a multicenter, prospective, post-market-approval study. Our purpose is to report the current results at 10 years of follow-up.

METHODS

Between October 2006 and December 2009, 280 primary BHR procedures were performed at 5 sites. Outcome measures included Kaplan-Meier survivorship, reasons for revision, radiographic component stability and osteolysis, Harris hip scores, and metal levels including cobalt and chromium. The mean age at the time of the procedure was 51.3 ± 7.1 years, 74% (206) of 280 BHRs were implanted in male patients, the mean body mass index was 27.8 ± 4.4 kg/m2, and 95% (265) of 280 hips had a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis. The mean follow-up among all 280 hips was 9.0 ± 2.5 years. Prior to 10-year follow-up, 20 hips were revised and 5 patients representing 5 hips had died. Among the remaining 255 hips, 218 (85%) met the minimum follow-up of 10 years.

RESULTS

The 10-year survival free from all-cause component revision was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.8% to 96.1%) for all hips and 96.0% (95% CI, 93.1% to 98.9%) among male patients <65 years old at the time of the procedure. Reasons for revision included femoral loosening (n = 5), femoral neck fracture (n = 3), pseudotumor (n = 3), osteolysis (n = 2), and acetabular loosening (n = 1), as well as 6 revisions for a combination of pain, noise, or metal levels. Among unrevised hips, the median Harris hip score improved from preoperatively (59) to 1 year postoperatively (99; p < 0.001) and remained stable through 10 years postoperatively (99; p = 0.08). Radiographically, 5% (10) of 218 unrevised hips had osteolysis with no component migration. Median metal levels had increased at 1 year postoperatively (cobalt: from 0.12 ppb preoperatively to 1.5 ppb at 1 year postoperatively, p < 0.001; chromium: from 0.6 ppb preoperatively to 1.7 ppb at 1 year postoperatively, p < 0.001), then remained stable through 5 years before slightly decreasing at 10 years postoperatively (cobalt: 1.3 ppb, p < 0.001; chromium: 1.4 ppb, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective, multicenter, post-market-approval study demonstrated that the BHR implant system is safe and effective through 10 years of follow-up, particularly among young male patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The 20-year results of the first 400 Conserve Plus hip resurfacing arthroplasties

AIMS

Adverse local tissue reactions associated with abnormal wear considerably slowed down the general use of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), now limited to a few specialized centres. In this study, we provide the clinical results of 400 consecutive MoM HRAs implanted more than 20 years ago in one such centre.

METHODS

A total of 355 patients (400 hips) were treated with Conserve Plus HRA between November 1996 and November 2000. There were 96 female (27%) and 259 male patients (73%). Their mean age was 48.2 years (SD 10.9). The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) hip scores and 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) quality of life scores were reported. Survivorship was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 16.5 years (0.1 to 24.0), including 34 patients (37 hips) who died. The mean UCLA hip scores were 9.3 (2 to 10), 9.1 (3 to 10), 9.0 (3 to 10), and 6.9 (2 to 10) for pain, walking, function, and activity, respectively. The mean SF-12 scores were 48.4 (16.0 to 62.1) for the physical component and 48.5 (10.5 to 66.5) for the mental component, and did not differ from those of the general population of the USA. A total of 60 hips in 55 patients were revised. Using revision for any indication as the endpoint, the Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 83.5% at 20 years. A diagnosis of developmental dysplasia (hazard ratio (HR) 2.199 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.140 to 4.239); p = 0.019) and a low BMI (HR 0.931 (95% CI 0.873 to 0.994); p = 0.032) were risk factors for revision. Female sex was a risk factor only because of hip dysplasia and small component size. There were no cases of metal sensitivity associated with revision surgery. Radiological analysis showed persistent fixation in all but one hip.

CONCLUSION

The 83.5% 20-year survivorship of this initial series surpasses that of total hip arthroplasties in use 20 years ago in these young patients, suggesting satisfactory lifelong durability of the device for almost all of the remaining patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):25-32.

Progression of adverse local tissue reaction in ASR metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a longitudinal MARS-MRI study at mid- to long-term

BACKGROUND

Despite the large number of studies assessing adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) in metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants, there is still a lack of knowledge about the natural progression of ALTR. The aims of this study were to describe the natural course of changes in ALTR at mid- to long-term follow-up for patients treated with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty and to determine possible risk factors associated with change in ALTR.

METHODS

A total of 158 patients (158 hips), 109 MoM hip resurfacing arthroplasties (HRAs) and 49 MoM total hip arthroplasties (THAs), with 2 clinical follow-ups including MARS-MRIs were included. The mean time from index operation to the first visit was 7.6 years (range 3.4-11.4 years), and the mean time between the 2 visits was 1.0 year (range 0.7-1.6 years).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with moderate or severe ALTR did not increase significantly between the first and second visit for the MoM HRA group (14.7-15.6%; p = 0.850) or the MoM THA group (32.7-36.7%; p = 0.671). 8 (7.3%) HRA patients and 9 (18.4%) THA patients progressed in ALTR grade. None of the collected clinical variables was sensitive or specific in identifying patients with ALTR progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ALTR prevalence was high in our cohort, clinically significant ALTR progression was rare. We were unable to find any predictors associated with ALTR change. This indicates that MARS-MRI remains a valuable tool in the follow-up of patients treated with MoM hip devices in identifying patients who may need revision surgery.

A Comparative Cohort Study With a 20-Year Age Gap: Hip Resurfacing in Patients Aged ≤35 Years and Patients Aged ≥55 Years

Background

This single-center retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate and compare implant survival and patient-reported outcome measures in 2 distinct age groups separated by 20 years who underwent hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA).

Methods

Between 2005 and 2014, 2042 HRAs were performed by a single-surgeon, and 75 and 377 hips from patients aged ≤35 years and ≥55 years, respectively, were included in this study. Implant survival was determined for all available hips. Clinical features and patient-reported outcome measures were collected.

Results

Seven hips were revised, 4 for aseptic loosening of one or both components, one for infection, one for accelerated wear and metallosis, and one for femoral neck fracture. There was no difference in all-cause 10-year revision, with 97.1% (95% confidence interval 80.9 to 99.6) and 99.6% (95% confidence interval: 97 to 99.9) survivorship in younger and older patients, respectively (P = .246). Preoperatively, younger patients were less active than older patients on the Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) or University of California, Los Angeles, activity scale, but at follow-up, younger patients outpaced older ones.

Conclusion

Original to our study was the isolation and comparison of 2 distinct age groups. With excellent results in disparate age groups, HRA can be applied to a broad patient demographic and is suitable for those patients who want to achieve a high activity level as defined by Lower Extremity Activity Scale or University of California, Los Angeles, scores.

No added value for Computer-Assisted surgery to improve femoral component positioning and Patient Reported Outcomes in Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty; a multi-center randomized controlled trial

Background

Computer Assisted Surgery (CAS) has proven to improve the accuracy in several orthopedic procedures. Therefore we used this technique to evaluate femoral component positioning in Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (HRA). The aim of this study was to evaluate imageless CAS compared to manually implanted femoral components and subsequently evaluates Patient Related Outcome Measures (PROMs). We hypothesized that the use of CAS optimizes the position of the femoral component and improves PROMs.

Methods

This is a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial of two groups. In the CAS group guiding of the femoral component was done with imageless navigation. In the Conventional (control) group the femoral component was placed manually according to the preplanned position. The primary outcome measure consists of a maximum of 3 degrees difference between the postoperative Stem Shaft Angle (SSA) and preplanned SSA. Secondary outcome measures consist of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale (HOOS), the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score.

Results

A total of 122 patients were randomized, 61 in the CAS group and 61 in the conventional group. There was no significant differences in accuracy of femoral implant position. The mean difference between the postoperative- and preplanned SSA was − 2.26 and − 1.75 degrees (more varus) respectively in the CAS and Conventional group. After surgery both groups show significant improvement in all PROMs compared to the baseline measurements, with no significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion

Our cohort indicates no benefit for the use of CAS in accuracy of placement of the femoral component in HRA compared to manual implantation. There are no clinical differences in PROMs after 1 year follow up. This study showed no added value and no justification for the use of CAS in femoral component positioning in HRA.

Trial registration

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrails.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/) on the 25th of October 2006: NCT00391937.

Level of incidence

Level IIb, multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of hip resurfacing arthroplasty after eight years – a retrospective study

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 (p < 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.

Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing in Patients 45 Years of Age and Younger at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Metal on metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) is an alternative to total hip arthroplasty in young and active patients. The purpose was to determine the survivorship of MoM-HR procedures performed in patients aged 45 years and younger assessing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at minimum 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

All 217 patients equal to or younger than 45 years of age at the time of surgical intervention presenting to our center with MoM-HR between May 2002 and May 2011 were prospectively followed. Baseline demographic data, preoperative and postoperative radiographic measurements, and validated PROMs were obtained (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and University of California, Los Angeles Activity Score). Survivorship was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and risk factors for failure were identified using multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

The overall survivorship excluding septic failures was 94.6% and 93.8% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Aseptic loosening of the acetabular component was the most common mode of failure (11/20 cases). Gender, head size, and acetabular abduction angle had no significant effect on survivorship. Significant improvements in PROMs were seen for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and University of California, Los Angeles Activity Scale (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that MoM-HR is a suitable option for young individuals, as demonstrated through improved functional scores and low revision rates. The survivorship of HR in the younger than 45 age-group was similar to that of total hip arthroplasty, as well as HR in older patients. Given the proposed benefits of HR, this procedure may be viewed as a viable option in patients aged younger than 45 years.

Can gamma irradiation during radiotherapy influence the metal release process for biomedical CoCrMo and 316L alloys?

The extent of metal release from implant materials that are irradiated during radiotherapy may be influenced by irradiation-formed radicals. The influence of gamma irradiation, with a total dose of relevance for radiotherapy (e.g., for cancer treatments) on the extent of metal release from biomedical stainless steel AISI 316L and a cobalt-chromium alloy (CoCrMo) was investigated in physiological relevant solutions (phosphate buffered saline with and without 10 g/L bovine serum albumin) at pH 7.3. Directly after irradiation, the released amounts of metals were significantly higher for irradiated CoCrMo as compared to nonirradiated CoCrMo, resulting in an increased surface passivation (enhanced passive conditions) that hindered further release. A similar effect was observed for 316L showing lower nickel release after 1 h of initially irradiated samples as compared to nonirradiated samples. However, the effect of irradiation (total dose of 16.5 Gy) on metal release and surface oxide composition and thickness was generally small. Most metals were released initially (within seconds) upon immersion from CoCrMo but not from 316L. Albumin induced an increased amount of released metals from AISI 316L but not from CoCrMo. Albumin was not found to aggregate to any greater extent either upon gamma irradiation or in the presence of trace metal ions, as determined using different light scattering techniques. Further studies should elucidate the effect of repeated friction and fractionated low irradiation doses on the short- and long term metal release process of biomedical materials. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 106B: 2673-2680, 2018.

Long - term survivorship and clinical results of the navigated withdrawn ASR ™

Introduction

Primary goals of the study were to present the mid - to long - term survivorship and clinical, radiological and metal serological results of the first stem - navigated ASR™ resurfacing at our clinic. Secondary goals were to determine the influence of stem - navigation on the outcome and risk factors for revision in our cohort.

Methods

From Mai 2006 to Mai 2009 46 ASR™ resurfacing hip systems have been implanted in 43 patients with a median age of 55 years. At final follow - up (33 patients with a mean follow -up of 89,6 months) guidelines were followed and HHS and HOOS were completed. Inclination, NSA and SSA were measured on radiographs and signs of loosening were graded. Risk factors for revision were compared in the non - revision and revision group.

Results

Mean cumulative survival of the prosthesis after 99,9 Months was 81,8%. At final follow - up 8 revisions were performed. Median HHS was 97, HOOS was 87,2. Four prostheses showed signs of loosening and nine heterotopic ossifications. All shaft components, except one, were placed in minimal valgus position to avoid risk for fracture. Age and diameter of the femoral component were significantly different between the non - revision and revision group.

Discussion

Survivorship is comparable to numbers found in other studies. Patients with complete final follow - up in general had good objective and subjective scores and few signs of loosening in the radiological follow - up. Navigation might have a positive effect on reduction of risk for fracture. Age and diameter of the femoral component seem to influence the outcome.

What should I expect from my recalled Adept Hip Resurfacing?

"My Hip Resurfacing (HR) has been recalled. What will happen to me?" This is the question of every patient who underwent an implant recall, a highly stressful event for both patients and physicians. Triggered by a 11.64% failure rate at 7 years, a recall process started for Adept HR with head diameter less than 48 mm. We report our experience in the recall process of 40 patients with the above-mentioned components. One patient underwent revision surgery due to an adverse reaction to metal debris at 5-year follow-up. None of the patients were scheduled for revision, with an estimated survival rate of 97.6% at 7 years. Implants were well positioned with an average acetabular inclination angle of 37°. Cobalt and chromium blood levels were below the safety threshold of clinical relevance. Functional scores were excellent. In the case of a well-positioned device with normal ion levels, a good performance of the implant is generally observed. Even if we experienced a very low revision rate, this may certainly get worse over time since not all possible failures are predictable, thus requiring a careful periodic follow-up.

Hip Resurfacing: International Perspectives: Review Article

BACKGROUND

The hip resurfacing concept was developed for young and active patients, especially for femoral bone stock preservation. However, concerns about metal-on-metal bearings with adverse reactions to metal debris have led to a drop off in hip-resurfacing procedures.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The goal of this review is to evaluate our current knowledge of survivorship of second-generation hip resurfacing devices and elaborate international perspectives for product improvement.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search provided information on national joint arthroplasty registers worldwide with a minimum of 3000 reported hip resurfacings. It culminated in the analysis of six registers.

RESULTS

Long-term data showed that available hip resurfacing device survivorship ranged from 95 to 99.7% with 10 years of follow-up, in selected patient populations. The criteria for success were well known, male gender, good bone quality, head component size greater than 48 mm, and cup inclination less than 45°. On the other hand, the recent recall of some hip-resurfacing devices has resulted in huge medico-legal problems and has discredited all implants. It has brought about the recent evolution of hip resurfacing. Femoral fixation is now available for cemented and cementless surfaces. Bearings are still always metal-on-metal, but new types have come on board. Newer designs suggest that ceramic-on-ceramic, cross-linked polyethylene, and oxinium may be applied in this configuration.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2015, the evolution of hip resurfacing is ongoing in terms of implant design, alternative bearings, and implant fixation with hopes of improving survivorship.

Comparison of Cemented and Bone Ingrowth Fixation Methods in Hip Resurfacing for Osteonecrosis

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical treatment for osteonecrosis of the femoral head has yet to be elucidated. To evaluate the role of femoral fixation techniques in hip resurfacing, we present a comparison of the results for 2 consecutive groups: group 1 (75 hips) received hybrid hip resurfacing implants with a cemented femoral component; group 2 (103 hips) received uncemented femoral components. Both groups received uncemented acetabular components.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed our clinical database to compare failures, reoperations, complications, clinical results, metal ion test results, and X-ray measurements. Using consecutive groups caused time interval bias, so we required all group 2 patients to be at least 2 years out from surgery; we compared results from 2 years and final follow-up.

RESULTS

Patient groups matched similarly in age, body mass index, and percent female. Despite similar demographics, the uncemented, group 2 cases showed a lower raw failure rate (0% vs 16%; P < .0001), a lower 2-year failure rate (0% vs 7%; P = .04), and a superior 8-year implant survivorship (100% vs 91%; log-rank P = .0028; Wilcoxon P = .0026). In cases that did not fail, patient clinical (P = .05), activity (P = .02), and pain scores (P = .03), as well as acetabular component position (P < .0001), all improved in group 2, suggesting advancements in surgical management. There were no cases of adverse wear-related failure in either group.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a superior outcome for cases of osteonecrosis with uncemented hip resurfacings compared to cases employing hybrid devices.

Trochanteric Femoral Fracture Around a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Prosthesis: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

CASE

A traumatic nondisplaced periprosthetic trochanteric fracture around a well-fixed and functioning Birmingham Hip Resurfacing prosthesis was managed with a reconstruction intramedullary nail. The surgical procedure provided excellent pain relief, and the patient was able to mobilize with crutches the day after surgery. Follow-up at 1 year confirmed excellent clinical and radiographic results.

CONCLUSION

In a patient with a previously well-functioning hip resurfacing prosthesis, internal fixation rather than revision hip arthroplasty can offer good clinical and radiographic outcomes. The use of a reconstruction intramedullary nail may be a good option for fixing a periprosthetic trochanteric fracture around a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing implant.

An Assessment of Gender-Specific Risk of Implant Revision After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been a successful reconstructive procedure to mitigate pain associated with diseases of the hip joint. However, some THA procedures require revision due to mechanical or biological failure. The purpose of this study was to synthesize and examine the evidence on the relative risk of revision in men and women after primary THA procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review of cohort studies reporting THA revision risk estimate by gender. Study quality scoring and a random effects meta-analysis were performed to estimate the meta-relative risk (meta-RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of revision, comparing men to women.

RESULTS

Males had a statistically significant increased risk of revision after primary THA (meta-RR = 1.33 [95% CI: 1.13-1.57]), when compared to females. When stratified by cause of revision, males had a statistically significant increased risk of revision due to any cause (meta-RR = 1.16 [95% CI: 1.01-1.33]), aseptic loosening (meta-RR = 1.54 [95% CI: 1.05-2.25]), and infection (meta-RR = 1.55 [95% CI: 1.11-2.15]). For primary THA operations performed during the 2000s, males in Europe had a statistically significant increased risk of revision (meta-RR 1.42 [95% CI: 1.25-1.61]) while males in the United States had a statistically significant decreased risk of revision (meta-RR 0.80 [95% CI: 0.72-0.89]).

CONCLUSION

These results provide evidence for an increased risk of revision after THA among males, which may be impacted by geographic location and time period of operation. Findings suggest that a better understanding of the underlying drivers of gender-specific risks would help reduce postsurgery complications.

Proximal Femur Bone Density Decreases up to 5 Years After Total Hip Arthroplasty in Young, Active Patients

BACKGROUND

The number of young, active patients undergoing hip arthroplasty continues to increase. The purpose of this study was to evaluate femoral bone density over a 5-year period after hip arthroplasty in young, active patients.

METHODS

A total of 96 patients (103 hips) with a presymptomatic University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score ≥6 who had a total hip arthroplasty (THA; 45 hips) or surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA; 58 hips) were prospectively enrolled. UCLA and Harris Hip Scores were collected preoperatively and postoperatively, and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry scans were performed at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years postoperatively. Bone density was analyzed for 7 traditional Gruen zones in both groups and 6 femoral neck zones in the SRA group. Bone density ratios were calculated for change in bone density compared with baseline.

RESULTS

No differences were present in the preoperative or postoperative UCLA or Harris Hip Scores between the SRA and THA cohorts (P = .07-.7). In the THA group, bone density never returned to baseline during the 5-year period in Gruen zones 1 (91.2% of baseline), 2 (94.8%), 6 (97.3%), and 7 (89.2%). There were no decreases in bone mineral density ratio for the femoral Gruen zones in the SRA group at any interval. Femoral neck bone density after SRA increased on the lateral, tension side up to 5 years postoperatively (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Young, active patients undergoing THA with cementless femoral fixation demonstrate reductions in bone density in the proximal femur in Gruen zones 1, 2, and 7 over time.

Scoring the Current Risk Stratification Guidelines in Follow-up Evaluation of Patients After Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty: A Proposal for a Metal-on-Metal Risk Score Supporting Clinical Decision-Making

BACKGROUND

In the follow-up evaluation of patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements, current evidence suggests that orthopaedic surgeons should avoid reliance on any single investigative tool. Current risk stratification guidelines can be difficult to interpret because they do not provide guidance when there are several risk factors in different groups (high and low risk). To improve the clinical utility of risk stratification guidelines, we designed a scoring system to assess the risk of revision.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 1,709 patients (1,912 hips) enrolled in a multicenter follow-up study of a recalled MoM hip replacement. Eleven scoring criteria were determined on the basis of existing follow-up algorithm recommendations and consisted of patient-related factors, symptoms, clinical status, implant type, metal ion levels, and radiographic imaging results. Forward stepwise logistic regression was conducted to determine the minimum set of predictive variables for the risk of revision and to assign variable weights. The MoM risk score for each hip was then created by averaging the weighted values of each predictive variable.

RESULTS

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis yielded good discrimination between all revised and unrevised hips, with an area under the curve of 0.82 (p < 0.001). The odds of revision for the group with a high MoM risk score were increased by 5.8-fold (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1 to 11.0) relative to the moderate risk group and by 21.8-fold (95% CI, 9.9 to 48.0) compared with the low risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of MoM hip arthroplasty has been limited since 2010, we continue to be faced with the follow-up and risk assessment of thousands of patients who have not had a revision. As more knowledge about risk stratification is gained, the complexity of the algorithms is expected to increase. We propose the use of the MoM risk score as a tool to aid in the clinical decision-making process.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Birmingham mid-head resection arthroplasty--minimum two year clinical and radiological follow-up: an independent single surgeon series

We report the results of the Birmingham Mid-Head Resection Arthroplasty (BMHR) for patients with poor femoral head bone quality where standard hip resurfacing is contraindicated. This is a clinical and radiological follow-up of the first 35 consecutive procedures (34 patients, 16 male, 18 female) performed by an independent surgeon. The mean follow-up was 2.8 years (2.1 to 4.1) and no patients were lost to follow-up. The mean age at the time of surgery was 50.4 years (23.8 to 69.4). There were no failures. The mean HHS improved from 46.6 (25 to 70) pre-operatively to 96.1 (72 to 100) post-operatively. The mean OHS was 36.4 (19 to 53) pre-operatively and 14.2 (12 to 34) post-operatively. The mean WOMAC score was 45.6 (7 to 92) pre-operatively and 4.3 (0 to 28) post-operatively. The mean UCLA activity score was 4.5 (1 to 9) pre-operatively and 7.6 (5 to 10) post-operatively. Radiographic analysis did not show any adverse features such as stress shielding, loosening or femoral neck narrowing. The BMHR provides an excellent alternative to conventional total hip arthroplasty in patients with poor femoral head bone quality who are not suitable for standard resurfacing.

Guideline for Diagnostic and Treatment of Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head

There is a new knowledge for clinical presentations and findings of imagine in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) in recent more than ten years. According to clinical data in Chinese huge patients with ONFH, the guideline for diagnosis and treatment of ONFH has been put forward by Chinese specialists. The newer contents of guideline include the definition for predisposing risk factors of ONFH, the new knowledge for clinical manifestations, the new interpretation for changes of imagine, important differential diagnosis. Based on the supplementary and revision for widely used staging and classification system, the new Chinese staging and classification system have been established. The advantages of Chinese staging and classification system accord with clinical and pathological features, it could be predicted the prognosis, and clinical applications are convenient. The guideline gives a brief account of principles for treatment selection and treatment methods for enhancement of diagnosis and treatment for ONFH.

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty in patients with varus deformity of the femoral neck-shaft angle

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in patients with a varus deformity of the femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA) is associated with poorer outcomes. Our experience has not reflected this. We examined the Oxford Hip Scores (OHS), Harris Hip Scores (HHS) and outcomes of patients with varus hips against a normal cohort to ascertain any significant difference. We identified 179 patients. Measurement of the femoral neck-shaft angle was undertaken from antero-posterior radiographs pre-operatively. The mean NSA was 128.5 degrees (SD 6.3). Patients with a NSA of less than 122.2 were deemed varus and those above 134.8 valgus. These parameters were consistent with published anatomical studies. The 'varus' cohort consisted of 23 patients, mean NSA 118.7 (range 113.6-121.5), mean follow-up 49 months (range 13-74). Mean OHS and HHS were 16 and 93.5 respectively. Complications included 2 cases of trochanteric non-union, but there were no femoral neck fractures, early failures or revisions. The 'normal' cohort consisted of 125 patients, mean NSA 128 degrees, mean follow-up 41 months (range 6-76). The OHS and HSS were 18.8 and 88.9 respectively. Complications included 5 trochanteric non-unions and 1 revision due to an acetabular fracture following a fall. Statistical analysis demonstrated no statistical difference between the cohorts' OHS (p=0.583) or HHS (p=0.139). Our experience in patients with a varus femoral neck has been positive. We have not yet experienced any femoral neck fractures, which we believe is in part due to the use of an uncemented femoral component and preservation of blood supply.

Increased risk for extended acetabular reconstruction in failed hip resurfacing as compared to failed total hip arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Hip resurfacing (HR) is intended to preserve the femoral bone stock during primary arthroplasty. On the other hand, little has been reported regarding the intraoperative need of bone reconstruction for extended acetabular defects during hip resurfacing revision. Thus, the aim of the presented study was to identify whether there is an increased need for acetabular bone reconstruction in HR revision surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed the data of 38 patients who underwent 39 conversions from a HR to a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Acetabular bone defects and the respective revision technique were compared against a temporary cohort of patients undergoing revision surgery of a conventional THA.

RESULTS

In 29 HR patients revision required either autogenous or allogenous impaction bone grafting to adequately manage acetabular host bone degradation. In 10 cases additional implantation of a reinforcement device was necessary. Compared to the THA cohort revision of failed HR is associated with a significantly increased risk of higher grade bone defects (Paprosky classification) and extended acetabular reconstruction (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that revision of failed HR devices is associated with an increased risk for extensive acetabular defects. Furthermore, the preoperative radiographic assessment of HR devices often underestimates the intraoperative acetabular defect. Surgeons should be aware of this fact not to technically underestimate HR revision procedures.

The Tribology of Explanted Hip Resurfacings Following Early Fracture of the Femur

A recognized issue related to metal-on-metal hip resurfacings is early fracture of the femur. Most theories regarding the cause of fracture relate to clinical factors but an engineering analysis of failed hip resurfacings has not previously been reported. The objective of this work was to determine the wear volumes and surface roughness values of a cohort of retrieved hip resurfacings which were removed due to early femoral fracture, infection and avascular necrosis (AVN). Nine resurfacing femoral heads were obtained following early fracture of the femur, a further five were retrieved due to infection and AVN. All fourteen were measured for volumetric wear using a co-ordinate measuring machine. Wear rates were then calculated and regions of the articulating surface were divided into "worn" and "unworn". Roughness values in these regions were measured using a non-contacting profilometer. The mean time to fracture was 3.7 months compared with 44.4 months for retrieval due to infection and AVN. Average wear rates in the early fracture heads were 64 times greater than those in the infection and AVN retrievals. Given the high wear rates of the early fracture components, such wear may be linked to an increased risk of femoral neck fracture.

Computed tomography evaluation of hip geometry restoration after total hip resurfacing

BACKGROUND

Anatomic reconstruction of the hip is among the main requirements for hip arthroplasty to be successful. Resurfacing arthroplasty may improve replication of the native joint geometry but has been evaluated only using standard radiographs. We therefore performed a computed tomography (CT) study to assess restoration of hip geometry after total hip resurfacing (HR), comparatively with the non-operated side.

HYPOTHESIS

HR does not change native extra-medullary hip geometry by more than 5mm and/or 5°.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

CT was used to evaluate unilateral HR in 75 patients with a mean age of 52.2years (range, 22-67years). The normal non-operated side served as the control in each patient. Mean follow-up was 2.5years (range, 1.9-3.1years). The primary evaluation criteria were femoral offset (FO) and femoral neck anteversion (FNA) and the secondary criteria were cup inclination angle, cup anteversion angle, and lower-limb length.

RESULTS

FO showed a non-significant decrease (mean, -2.2mm; range, -4.5 to +3.7mm). FNA was preserved, with a difference of less than 2° at last follow-up versus the preoperative value. Cup measurements showed a mean anteversion angle of 24.8° (0.9-48.6) and mean inclination angle of 44.1° (32.1-56.3); corresponding values for the native acetabulum were 38.9° (20.5-54.8) and 24.8° (4.8-33.6). The residual lower-limb length discrepancy was less than 1mm (mean, -0.04mm [-1.2 to +1.6mm]). The mean angle between the femoral implant and the femoral neck axis was 5.4° of valgus.

DISCUSSION

Our results show that HR accurately restored the native extra-medullary hip geometry.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, prospective diagnostic case-control study.

Effect of surgical experience on imageless computer-assisted femoral component positioning in hip resurfacing--a preclinical study

Background

The clinical outcome of hip resurfacing (HR) as a demanding surgical technique associated with a substantial learning curve depends on the position of the femoral component. The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of the level of surgical experience on computer-assisted imageless navigation concerning precision of femoral component positioning, notching, and oversizing rate, as well as operative time.

Methods

Three surgeons with different levels of experience in both HR and computer-assisted surgery (CAS) prepared the femoral heads of 54 synthetic femurs using the Durom^TM Hip Resurfacing (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) system. Each surgeon prepared a total of 18 proximal femurs using the Navitrack® system (ORTHOsoft Inc., Montreal, Canada) or the conventional free-hand Durom^TM K-wire positioning jig. The differences between planned and postoperative stem shaft angle (SSA) and anteversion angle in standardized x-rays were measured and the operative time, not including the time for calibrating the CAS-system, was documented. Notching was evaluated by the three surgeons in a randomized manner. Oversizing was determined by the difference of the preoperative determined cap and the cap size advised by the CAS-system.

Results

CAS significantly reduced the overall mean deviation between planned and postoperative SSA in comparison with the conventional procedure (mean ± SD, 1 ± 1.7° vs. 7.4 ± 4.4°, P <0.01) regardless of the surgeon’s level of experience. The incidence of either varus or valgus SSA deviations exceeding 5° were 1/27 for CAS and 15/27 for the conventional method, respectively (P <0.001), corresponding to a reduction by 97%. Using CAS, the rate of notching was reduced by 100%.

Conclusions

The accuracy of femoral HR component orientation is significantly increased by use of CAS regardless of the surgeon’s level of experience in our preclinical study. Thus, imageless computer-assisted navigation can be a valuable tool to improve implant positioning in HR for surgeons at any stage of their learning curve.

Clinical results of the conserve plus metal on metal hip resurfacing: an independent series

The purpose of the present study was to report the clinical and radiographic results of an independent series of the Conserve Plus hip resurfacing. Five hundred forty-eight consecutive hip resurfacings were performed using the Conserve Plus prosthesis in 458 patients (350 males) with a mean age of 48.3 years (range 19 to 66). No patients were lost to follow-up. At a mean follow-up of 6.6 years (3.9 to 11.9) thirty (5.4%) hips required conversion to a total hip arthroplasty (THA) (20 males, 10 females, mean age=48.3±7.3 years). Five-year survival with as revision endpoint was 94.5% (95% CI: 93.5% to 95.5%). This study confirms the good clinical results previously reported with the Conserve Plus hip resurfacing device.

Results of Birmingham hip resurfacing at 12 to 15 years

We report a 12- to 15-year implant survival assessment of a prospective single-surgeon series of Birmingham Hip Resurfacings (BHRs). The earliest 1000 consecutive BHRs including 288 women (335 hips) and 598 men (665 hips) of all ages and diagnoses with no exclusions were prospectively followed-up with postal questionnaires, of whom the first 402 BHRs (350 patients) also had clinical and radiological review.

Mean follow-up was 13.7 years (12.3 to 15.3). In total, 59 patients (68 hips) died 0.7 to 12.6 years following surgery from unrelated causes. There were 38 revisions, 0.1 to 13.9 years (median 8.7) following operation, including 17 femoral failures (1.7%) and seven each of infections, soft-tissue reactions and other causes. With revision for any reason as the end-point Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed 97.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.9 to 97.9) and 95.8% (95% CI 95.1 to 96.5) survival at ten and 15 years, respectively. Radiological assessment showed 11 (3.5%) femoral and 13 (4.1%) acetabular radiolucencies which were not deemed failures and one radiological femoral failure (0.3%).

Our study shows that the performance of the BHR continues to be good at 12- to 15-year follow-up. Men have better implant survival (98.0%; 95% CI 97.4 to 98.6) at 15 years than women (91.5%; 95% CI 89.8 to 93.2), and women < 60 years (90.5%; 95% CI 88.3 to 92.7) fare worse than others. Hip dysplasia and osteonecrosis are risk factors for failure. Patients under 50 years with osteoarthritis fare best (99.4%; 95% CI 98.8 to 100 survival at 15 years), with no failures in men in this group.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1298–1306.

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compared with 28-mm diameter metal-on-metal total hip replacement: a randomised study with six to nine years' follow-up

A total of 219 hips in 192 patients aged between 18 and 65 years were randomised to 28-mm metal-on-metal uncemented total hip replacements (THRs, 107 hips) or hybrid hip resurfacing (HR, 112 hips). At a mean follow-up of eight years (6.6 to 9.3) there was no significant difference between the THR and HR groups regarding rate of revision (4.0% (4 of 99) vs 5.8% (6 of 104), p = 0.569) or re-operation rates without revision (5.1% (5 of 99) vs 2.9% (3 of 104), p = 0.428). In the THR group one recurrent dislocation, two late deep infections and one peri-prosthetic fracture required revision, whereas in the HR group five patients underwent revision for femoral head loosening and one for adverse reaction to metal debris. The mean University of California, Los Angeles activity scores were significantly higher in HR (7.5 (sd 1.7) vs 6.9 (sd 1.7), p = 0.035), but similar mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores were obtained (5.8 (sd 9.5) in HR vs 5.1 (sd 8.9) in THR, p = 0.615) at the last follow-up. Osteolysis was found in 30 of 81 THR patients (37.4%), mostly in the proximal femur, compared with two of 83 HR patients (2.4%) (p < 0.001). At five years the mean metal ion levels were < 2.5 μg/l for cobalt and chromium in both groups; only titanium was significantly higher in the HR group (p = 0.001). Although revision rates and functional scores were similar in both groups at mid-term, long-term survival analysis is necessary to determine whether one procedure is more advantageous than the other.

Survival and functional outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing system in patients aged 65 and older at up to ten years of follow-up

PURPOSE

Limited evidence exists regarding the outcomes of hip resurfacing in elderly patients. The primary study aims were to determine the survival and functional outcome following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in patients ≥65 years at up to ten years of follow-up. Secondary aims were to explore factors affecting survival and functional outcome.

METHODS

Between 1997 and 2012, data were prospectively collected on 180 BHR (162 patients; mean age 69.2 years; 62 % male) implanted by one designing surgeon. Mean follow-up was six (range one to 14.4) years with no loss to follow-up. Outcomes of interest were implant survival, functional outcome [Oxford Hip Score (OHS)] and radiological evidence of implant failure.

RESULTS

Three hips were revised, giving an overall cumulative survival of 96.4 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 90.3-100] at ten years. Survival of 111 male BHR was 98.9 % (95 % CI 94.8-100) at ten years (one revision) compared with 91.9 % (95 % CI 77.0-100) in 69 female BHR (two revisions). Survival was affected by age (p = 0.014) and femoral head size (p = 0.024) but not by gender (p = 0.079). Median pre-operative OHS was 50.0 % [interquartile range (IQR) 37.5-68.8], improving to 4.4 % (IQR 0-10.4) postoperatively. Men had significantly better postoperative OHSs compared with women (median male OHS 2.1 % versus 6.3 % female OHS; p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Good survival and functional outcomes were achieved with the BHR at ten years in men and women ≥65 years. Despite registry findings to the contrary, age alone should not be a contraindication for hip resurfacing in centres with expertise in this procedure.

Radiographically undetectable periprosthetic osteolysis with ASR implants: the implication of blood metal ions

Patients with ASR implants (resurfacing and large-diameter (XL) metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty), even if asymptomatic and with a stable prosthesis, may present extremely high blood metal ion levels. We report on a consecutive series of fourteen ASR revisions, focusing on osteolysis and their radiographic correspondence and their correlation with blood metal ion levels. At revision, seven hips revealed severe periacetabular osteolysis which was radiographically undetectable in six and asymptomatic in five. Seven hips with no acetabular osteolysis had significantly lower serum Cr and Co ion concentrations (respectively 25.2, 41.1 μg/l) compared to the seven hips with severe acetabular bone loss (respectively 70.1, 147.0 μg/l). Elevated blood metal ion levels should be considered as a warning of undetectable and ongoing periprosthetic osteolysis in asymptomatic patients with ASR prosthesis.

A comparison of two resurfacing arthroplasty implants: medium-term clinical and radiographic results

The objective of this study was to perform a medium-term analysis comparing the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the CONSERVE® Plus (C+) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty systems. 137 hips were included in each cohort, with a mean follow-up of 60.0 ± 14.2 months and 63.3 ± 3.5 months in the C+ and BHR cohorts respectively. Latest review UCLA and HHS scores showed statistically significant improvements when compared with preoperative scores for both cohorts. UCLA and SF-12 physical component outcome scores were significantly different (p<0.01 and p = 0.04, respectively). Median serum chromium and cobalt levels were significantly increased in the BHR cohort (p = 0.001). Both cohorts demonstrated excellent Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates (96.9% in the C+ cohort, and 96.4% in the BHR cohort). Overall both implants appear to perform well in the medium term.

Survivorship, patient reported outcome and satisfaction following resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty

Resurfacing (RA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are options in the treatment of debilitating hip pathology. 381 patients that had undergone arthroplasty with a BHR RA, ASR RA, metal-on-metal (MoM) THA or ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) THA were reviewed for satisfaction, function, health and survivorship at a median follow up of 50 months. Significantly lower survivorship for revision and reoperation was observed in the ASR group. The BHR and CoC demonstrated better outcome scores than the ASR (OHS and SAPS) and the BHR better scores than the MoM (OHS and SF12 PCS). In the short to medium term, survivorship and outcomes for the best performing RA (BHR) and THA (CoC) were comparable. There was a non-significant trend towards poorer outcome scores in the MoM THA group.

[Revision rates in journal publications on joint prostheses with noticeably high failure rates in register data sets]

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF STUDY

The value of outcome quality data from clinical studies is an issue of controversial debate particularly in the context of adverse events. The aim of this study is to present and evaluate the data available from clinical studies for products that show inferior outcome in registers and to assess the possibility to draw valid conclusions from these data. STUDY DESIGN AND ANALYTICAL METHODS: Based on a structured literature research, a comparative analysis was made of the revision rates of 12 products showing significantly inferior average results in registers. The primary outcome parameter was the revision rate for any reason calculated using a standardized methodology and the parameter of revisions per 100 observed component years.

RESULTS

For 5 out of 12 products not a single comparable study was available and relatively few data were available for the remaining products. A conventional meta-analysis revealed that only three products showed results that were comparable with those from registers. For 75% of products good results were published. There was not a single case where it would have been possible to identify or isolate the problems that had led to the underperformance observed on the basis of clinical studies alone.

DISCUSSION

Clinical sample-based studies are not a suitable and reliable means to recognize potential product or handling problems and avoid risks for patients and physicians. In this respect registers can provide an essential contribution.

The First SICOT Oral Presentation Award 2011: imageless computer-assisted femoral component positioning in hip resurfacing: a prospective randomised trial

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of imageless computer-assisted surgery (CAS) on the accuracy of positioning of the femoral component and on the short-term clinical outcome in hip resurfacing (HR) using a randomised prospective design.

METHODS

A total of 75 consecutive patients undergoing HR were randomly allocated to CAS and conventional implantation, respectively. Preoperatively and six months post-operatively standardised pelvic anteroposterior X-ray images, the total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Harris Hip Score and the EQ-5D utility index were evaluated in a blinded manner. The primary end point of the study was a post-operative femoral component malpositioning in five degrees or more either varus or valgus absolute deviation from the planned stem shaft angle.

RESULTS

Patient demographics and algofunctional scores did not differ between the CAS and conventional implantation samples. Using CAS fewer femoral components were positioned in five or more degrees absolute deviation (4/37 vs 12/38, Fisher's exact p = 0.047; 95 % confidence interval for the primary end point's incidence difference: +3 %; +39 %); the respective incidences of five or more degrees of varus deviation were 0/37 vs 5/38. One conversion to a stemmed prosthesis (CAS group) was performed for periprosthetic femoral neck fracture. Radiological signs of superolateral femoral neck/implant impingement were observed in two cases (one CAS-based and one conventional implantation).

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of femoral HR component positioning was significantly improved using CAS. However, one major complication necessitated early revision in the CAS group at six months of observation. Apart from that adverse event no inter-group differences were observed for the short-term clinical outcome. Future studies need to address the clinical long-term relevance of CAS in HR.

Predictors of femoral neck fracture following hip resurfacing: a cadaveric study

We aimed to establish if radiological parameters, dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and quantitative CT (qCT) could predict the risk of sustaining a femoral neck fracture following hip resurfacing. Twenty-one unilateral fresh frozen femurs were used. Each femur had a plain digital anteroposterior radiograph, DEXA scan and qCT scan. Femurs were then prepared for a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing femoral component and loaded to failure. Results demonstrated that gender and qCT measurements showed strong correlation with failure load. QCT could be used as an individual measure to predict risk of post-operative femoral neck fracture. However, when qCT is unavailable; gender, pre-operative DEXA scan and Neck Width measurements can be used together to assess risk of post-operative femoral neck fracture in patients due to undergo hip resurfacing.

Hip resurfacing in a district general hospital: 6-year clinical results using the ReCap hip resurfacing system

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study was to prospectively report the clinical results of 280 consecutive hips (240 patients) who received a ReCap Hip Resurfacing System implant (Biomet Inc., Warsaw, USA) in a single district general hospital. Literature reports a large variation in clinical results between different resurfacing designs and published results using this particular design are scarce.

METHODS

Mean follow up was 3.3 years (1.0 to 6.3) and four patients were lost to follow-up. All patients were diagnosed with end-stage hip osteoarthritis, their mean age was 54 years and 76.4% of all patients were male.

RESULTS

There were 16 revisions and four patients reported a Harris Hip Score <70 points at their latest follow up. There were no pending revisions. Kaplan-Meier implant survival probability, with revision for any reason as endpoint, was 93.5% at six years follow-up (95%-CI: 88.8-95.3). There were no revisions for Adverse Reactions to Metal Debris (ARMD) and no indications of ARMD in symptomatic non-revised patients, although diagnostics were limited to ultrasound scans.

CONCLUSIONS

This independent series confirms that hip resurfacing is a demanding procedure, and that implant survival of the ReCap hip resurfacing system is on a critical level in our series. In non-revised patients, reported outcomes are generally excellent.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00603395.

Failure rates of metal-on-metal hip resurfacings: analysis of data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales

BACKGROUND

Implant survival after conventional total hip replacement (THR) is often poor in younger patients, so alternatives such as hip resurfacing, with various sizes to fit over the femoral head, have been explored. We assessed the survival of different sizes of metal-on-metal resurfacing in men and women, and compared this survival with those for conventional stemmed THRs.

METHODS

We analysed the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) for primary THRs undertaken between 2003 and 2011. Our analysis involved multivariable flexible parametric survival models to estimate the covariate-adjusted cumulative incidence of revision adjusting for the competing risk of death.

FINDINGS

The registry included 434,560 primary THRs, of which 31,932 were resurfacings. In women, resurfacing resulted in worse implant survival than did conventional THR irrespective of head size. Predicted 5-year revision rates in 55-year-old women were 8·3% (95% CI 7·2-9·7) with a 42 mm resurfacing head, 6·1% (5·3-7·0) with a 46 mm resurfacing head, and 1·5% (0·8-2·6) with a 28 mm cemented metal-on-polyethylene stemmed THR. In men with smaller femoral heads, resurfacing resulted in poor implant survival. Predicted 5-year revision rates in 55-year-old men were 4·1% (3·3-4·9) with a 46 mm resurfacing head, 2·6% (2·2-3·1) with a 54 mm resurfacing head, and 1·9% (1·5-2·4) with a 28 mm cemented metal-on-polyethylene stemmed THR. Of male resurfacing patients, only 23% (5085 of 22076) had head sizes of 54 mm or above.

INTERPRETATION

Hip resurfacing only resulted in similar implant survivorship to other surgical options in men with large femoral heads, and inferior implant survivorship in other patients, particularly women. We recommend that resurfacing is not undertaken in women and that preoperative measurement is used to assess suitability in men. Before further new implant technology is introduced we need to learn the lessons from resurfacing and metal-on-metal bearings.

FUNDING

National Joint Registry for England and Wales.

The removal of acetabular bone in hip resurfacing and cementless total hip replacement

The purpose of this study was to compare the amount of acetabular bone removed during hip resurfacing (HR) and cementless total hip replacement (THR), after controlling for the diameter of the patient’s native femoral head. Based on a power analysis, 64 consecutive patients (68 hips) undergoing HR or THR were prospectively enrolled in the study. The following data were recorded intra-operatively: the diameter of the native femoral head, the largest reamer used, the final size of the acetabular component, the size of the prosthetic femoral head and whether a decision was made to increase the size of the acetabular component in order to accommodate a larger prosthetic femoral head. Results were compared using two-sided, independent samples Student’s t-tests. A statistically significant difference was seen in the mean ratio of the size of the acetabular component to the diameter of the native femoral head (HR: 1.05 (sd 0.04) versus THR: 1.09 (sd 0.05); p <  0.001) and largest acetabular reamer used to the diameter of the native femoral head (HR: 1.03 (sd 0.04) versus THR: 1.09 (sd 0.05); p < 0.001). The ratios varied minimally when the groups were subdivided by gender, age and obesity. The decision to increase the size of the acetabular component to accommodate a larger femoral head occurred more often in the THR group (27% versus 9%). Despite the emphasis on avoiding damage to the femoral neck during HR, the ratio of the size of the acetabular component to the diameter of the native femoral head was larger in cementless THR than in HR.

ELIGIBILITY FOR THE HIP-RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY PROCEDURE: AN EVALUATION ON 592 HIPS

Objective: To investigate the percentage of ideal patients who would be eligible for hip-resurfacing surgery at a reference service for hip arthroplasty. Methods: Out of all the cases of hip arthroplasty operated at Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual de São Paulo (HSPE) between January 2009 and December 2010, we assessed a total of 592 procedures that would fit the criteria for indication for resurfacing arthroplasty, after clinical and radiological evaluation according to the criteria established by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and by Seyler et al. Results: Among the total number of hip replacement arthroplasty cases, 5.74% of the patients were eligible. Among the patients who underwent primary arthroplasty, we found that 8.23% presented ideal conditions for this procedure. Conclusion: The study demonstrated that this type of surgery still has a limited role among hip surgery methods.

Analysis of retrieved hip resurfacing arthroplasties reveals the interrelationship between interface hyperosteoidosis and demineralization of viable bone trabeculae

Retrieved hip resurfacing arthroplasties (HRA) revised for causes other than osteonecrosis enable further insights into bone-cement interactions within the interface with only minimal biomechanical stresses. Our primary objective was to investigate the mineralization changes at the trabecular bone interface in retrieved hips using bright field and polarized light microscopy and by quantitative backscattered electron imaging. Because superficial seams of non-mineralized bone tissue varied substantially, we defined hyperosteoidosis as an osteoid seam of more than 20 µm thickness. We hypothesized that interface hyperosteoidosis might be caused by the demineralization of previously mineralized bone tissue. One hundred and thirty-one retrieved HRAs with viable bone remnant tissue were analyzed. Bone mineral density distribution obtained from backscattered signal intensities of the trabecular bone at the bone-cement interface was assessed in cases with and without interface hyperosteoidosis. In cases with interface hyperosteoidosis, the degree of trabecular mineralization was also analyzed in deeper areas of the femoral remnants. Thirty-four cases showed hyperosteoidosis at the bone-cement interface, mostly in female patients. Bone trabeculae with hyperosteoidosis displayed a mineral density distribution pattern suggestive of the demineralization of a previously mineralized bone matrix. Our results demonstrate the localized disorder of the mineralization pattern of bone trabeculae at the bone-cement interface in a group of retrieved HRAs. In previously well-fixed femoral components, potential adverse effects on the load-bearing bone due to a decreased degree of mineralization at the bone-cement interface may affect the durability of the implant's function.

Theoretical relationships between component design, patient bone geometry and range-of-motion post hip resurfacing

Clinical studies indicate that range of motion until prosthetic impingement is important in understanding unexplained failures of hip resurfacings, yet the underlying biomechanical principles have received little attention. This study investigates the mathematical relationships between component design, position, patient bone geometry and range of motion in hip resurfaced prostheses. Variations in range of motion and impingement-free safe-zones for cup position were calculated using an established method of vector analysis that facilitated parametric analysis in a time efficient manner. The alpha angle, defined as the angle between the centreline of the femoral neck and the waist of the femoral head/neck junction, was used to represent the natural femoral neck. Range of motion and impingement-free safe-zones were inversely proportional to the alpha angle and cup inclusion angle. The size of the safe-zone was most sensitive to the alpha angle with a 6 degrees reduction, decreasing the range of cup positions without impingement by 80-100%. Lowering the upper limit of cup inclination from 55 degrees to 45 degrees reduced the range of cup positions that allow impingement-free motion by 47-94%. No common safe-zone was observed for the range of component sizes and positions investigated. This offers an explanation to why clinic studies have failed to associate outcome with standardised positioning criteria.

Postresurfacing periprosthetic femoral neck fractures: nonoperative treatment

Femoral neck fractures after total hip resurfacing procedures occur infrequently but require immediate orthopedic intervention. Historically, they have been treated by conversion to traditional total hip arthroplasty. However, to the authors' knowledge, no treatment algorithm has ever been described. The authors have directly treated or consulted on 13 cases of periprosthetic femoral neck fractures after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasties that were successfully treated nonoperatively: all fractures healed with protected weight bearing, producing excellent clinical results. Two cases are described in detail, and the authors propose a classification system that can assist the orthopedist in choosing the treatment regimen. Type I fractures are nondisplaced and should be initially treated nonoperatively with a course of protected weight bearing. If successful, the overall success of the resurfacing should not be compromised. Partially displaced, or type II, fractures may heal with nonoperative management. However, if the components have shifted, it may affect the long-term durability of the arthroplasty and eventually result in premature conversion to a traditional total hip replacement. Depending on the position of the components, it may also have an effect on the ion generation potential of the metal-on-metal articulation. This treatment pathway can be undertaken only with a full and detailed explanation of all of the possible complications and outcomes with the patient. Completely displaced, or type III, fractures require immediate conversion to total hip arthroplasty.

Accuracy of navigation in hip resurfacing with different surgeons and varying anatomy

The accuracy of a commercial imageless navigation system for hip resurfacing and its reproducibility among different surgeons and for varying femoral anatomy was tested by comparing conventional and navigated implantation of the femoral component on different sawbones in a hip simulator. The position of the component was measured on postoperative radiographs. Variance for varus/valgus alignment and anteversion was higher for conventional implantation. Among the three surgeons, operation time, chosen implant size and anteversion were significantly different for conventional implantation but not for the navigated method. Using navigation, no difference was found for normal and abnormal anatomy. Values obtained with the navigation system were consistent with those measured on radiographs. Navigation appeared to be accurate and helped to reduce outliers. This was true for the three different surgeons and in varying anatomical situations.

Femoral head to neck offset after hip resurfacing is critical for range of motion

BACKGROUND

Range of motion after hip arthroplasty may be limited by soft tissues around the hip, extra-articular contact and femoral stem-neck contact with the acetabular articular surface. Femoral head-neck diameter ratio is recognized as a major factor influencing hip range of motion. In hip resurfacing, range of motion is constrained by "cup component to femoral neck" contact. To avoid cup-to-bone contact or to increase the degree of flexion at which it occurs, anterior translation of the femoral component relative to the central femoral neck axis may improve anterior head-neck offset and hip flexion. We questioned whether low or high anterior femoral head to neck offset, cup inclination, stem anteversion, and component size influenced postoperative range of motion and hip flexion in patients who had undergone hip resurfacing.

METHODS

We prospectively followed 66 patients (68 hips) who underwent hip resurfacing at a mean age at operation of 46.4 years (range, 19-60 years). Mean follow-up was 37.5 months (range, 33-41 months). No patient was lost to follow-up. All patients were evaluated clinically and range of motion was precised. Radiological measurement evaluated the anterior femoral head-neck offset.

FINDINGS

Mean anterior neck-head offset was 7.5mm (range, 5-12 mm). We found significant linear regression correlation between anterior offset and flexion (R=0.66) and between anterior offset and global range of motion (R=0.51). One millimeter of anterior offset increased hip range of motion by 5° in flexion. No significant correlations were found between global range of motion or flexion arc of motion and component size, stem anteversion, cup inclination, gender ratio, preoperative arc of flexion or global range of motion.

INTERPRETATION

Restoring or improving deficient anterior femoral head-neck offset appears important for restoring postoperative range of motion and specifically hip flexion.

Femoral neck fracture following hardware removal

It is uncommon for femoral neck fractures to occur after proximal femoral hardware removal because age, osteoporosis, and technical error are often noted as the causes for this type of fracture. However, excessive alcohol consumption and failure to comply with protected weight bearing for 6 weeks increases the risk of femoral neck fractures.This article describes a case of a 57-year-old man with a high-energy ipsilateral inter-trochanteric hip fracture, comminuted distal third femoral shaft fracture, and displaced lateral tibial plateau fracture. Cephalomedullary fixation was used to fix the ipsilateral femur fractures after medical stabilization and evaluation of the patient. The patient healed clinically and radiographically at 6 months. Despite conservative treatment for painful proximal hardware, elective hip screw removal was performed 22.5 months after injury. Seven weeks later, he sustained a nontraumatic femoral neck fracture.In this case, it is unlikely that the femoral neck fracture occurred as a result of hardware removal. We assumed that, in addition to the patient's alcohol abuse and tobacco use, stress fractures may have attributed to the femoral neck fracture. We recommend using a shorter hip screw to minimize hardware prominence or possibly off-label use of an injectable bone filler, such as calcium phosphate cement.