Survival of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Weegen, Walter van der; Hoekstra, Henk J.; Sijbesma, Thea; Bos, Ellis; Schemitsch, Emil H.; Poolman, Rudolf W.

doi:10.1302/0301-620x.93b3.25594

Cited by 40 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the published literature there is a wide range of clinical results between different HRA designs [3,5,6]. Although numeral clinical studies report short- and mid-term survival of different HRA systems, these studies focus on a limited number of HRA designs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Weegen

Hoekstra

Sijbesma

et al. 2012

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe 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.MethodsMean 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.ResultsThere 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.ConclusionsThis 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 registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00603395

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Weegen

Hoekstra

Sijbesma

et al. 2012

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A systematic review of hip resurfacings from 2011 found that none of the hip resurfacing arthroplasty implants used met the full 10-year National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) benchmark of survival and only some studies (13 of 29) showed satisfactory survival against the 3-year NICE benchmark 20 . In a technology overview of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty, which looked at the results of the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry, the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register and the NJR, it was concluded that the revision rate for hip resurfacing arthroplasty was higher at three and seven years compared with conventional hip replacements 21 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Have the media influenced the use of hip resurfacing arthroplasty? A review of UK print media

Malviya

Stafford²,

Villar³

et al. 2012

Ann R Coll Surg Engl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONThe aim of this study was to look at the different claims made about hip resurfacing arthroplasty in the popular UK print media and how this relates to findings in the scientific literature.METHODSA review of UK popular print media from January 1992 to June 2011 was performed using the Lexis® Library online news database. Only articles discussing the clinical results of hip resurfacing arthroplasty were included. After excluding duplicates, 49 newspaper articles were found suitable for this study. The main outcome measure was the claims made in popular UK print media about hip resurfacing. These were compared with the scientific publication. We reviewed the trend of use of hip resurfacing prostheses during the same period as reported in the National Joint Registry.RESULTSA disparity was found between the claims in the newspapers and published scientific literature. The initial newspaper articles highlighted only the positive aspects of hip resurfacing arthroplasty, without definitive contemporary evidence backing the claims. Most of these claims were refuted by future scientific publications. The initial positive media reports coincided with an increase in the use of hip resurfacing but the decline coincided with negative reports in the scientific literature.CONCLUSIONSThe trend of the newspaper articles and that of the number of hip resurfacing prostheses implanted suggests that the media may have been partly responsible for the increased use of this prosthesis. The subsequent decrease was initiated by the scientific literature.

show abstract

“…[50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59] However, complications particular to this procedure have been identified (as stated previously), and emphasis is placed on patient selection, component selection and surgical technique to avoid poor and adverse outcomes and short-term failures. 44,47,[60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70] Many surgeons avoid resurfacing in postmenopausal women because of an increased risk of femoral neck fracture, and in those with known renal insufficiency owing to the potential for metal ion accumulation.…”

Section: Obesitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical management of hip osteoarthritis

Gandhi

Perruccio

Mahomed

2013

CMAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Review CMAJ• Total hip replacement with a metal-on-polyethylene bearing surface remains the gold standard for the treatment of end-stage hip osteoarthritis, providing reliable improvement in pain and function with consistent implant longevity.• Registry reports suggest an increased rate of revision for hip resurfacing compared with total hip replacement, particularly among female patients.• A further registry report showed an increased failure rate of metal-onmetal bearing surfaces compared with ceramic and polyethylene at 7 years.• The outcomes of revision total hip replacement are poorer than those of primary replacement, with patients reporting worse pain and poorer function at 5 years after revision surgery.

show abstract

Survival of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Cited by 40 publications

References 57 publications

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

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

Have the media influenced the use of hip resurfacing arthroplasty? A review of UK print media

Surgical management of hip osteoarthritis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About