Skip to main content
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Download PDF
  • Tissue-Sparing Surgery Section
  • Published:

Hip resurfacing: mid-term results of the last-generation metal-on-metal devices

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology volume 8, pages 202–206 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

Total hip resurfacing has long been conceptually attractive to both surgeons and patients. However, historically it has been plagued by limited durability and marked acetabular bone loss. The recent development of wear-resistant bearings such as metal-on-metal has led to renewed interest in hip resurfacing in the orthopaedic community. We report the clinical and radiological results of 350 consecutive surface arthroplasties performed in 325 patients (mean follow-up 20 months). Harris Hip Score increased over time from 57 pre-operatively to 98 at 2 years follow-up. Complication’s rate was low. Four patients required revision surgery. The overall survival rate was 98.8%. Considering the positive results of more than 350 implants of our series, we now believe that there is evidence showing that this surgical concept deserves consideration, particularly when treating young patients with hip diseases.

References

  1. Weber BG (1996) Experience with the Metasul total hip bearing system. Clin Orthop 329:S69–S77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wagner M, Wagner H (1996) Preliminary results of uncemented metal-on-metal stemmed and resurfacing hip replacement arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 329:S78–S88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Howie DW, Cornish BL, Vernon-Roberts B (1993) The viability of the femoral head after resurfacing hip arthroplasty in humans. Clin Orthop 291:171–184

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Campbell P, Mirra J, Amstutz HC (2000) Viability of the femoral heads treated with resurfacing arthroplasty. Arthroplasty 15(1):120–122

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Capello WN, Ireland PH, Tramell TR et al (1978) Conservative total hip arthroplasty: a procedure to conserve bone stock. Part 1 and Part 2. Clin Orthop 134:59–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dorr LD, Kane TJ 3rd, Conaty JP (1994) Long-term results of cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients 45 years old or younger: a 16 year follow up study. J Arthroplasty 9:453–456

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Joshi ANB, Porter ML, Trail IA et al (1993) Long term results of Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75:616–623

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Malchau P, Herberts P, Soderman P, Oden A (2000) Update and validation of results from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Registry 1979–1998. In: Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons

  9. Kishida Y, Sugano N, Nishii T, Miki K, Yamaguchi K, Yoshikawa H (2004) Preservation of the bone mineral density of the femur after surface replacement of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:185–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Loughead JM, Chesney D, Holland JP, McCaskie AW (2005) Comparison of offset in Birmingham hip resurfacing and hybrid total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:163–166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Daniel J, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJW (2004) Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:177–184

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Treacy RCB, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB (2005) Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a minimum follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:167–170

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Amstutz HC, Beaulè PE, Frederick JD, Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA (2004) Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two-to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:28–39

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Millennium Research Group (2002) Global markets for hip reconstructive devices 2002. Millennium Research Group, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  15. Vendittoli PA, Lavigne M, Girard J, Roy AG (2006) A randomised study comparing resection of acetabular bone at resurfacing and total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(8):997–1002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shimmin AJ, Back D (2005) Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:463–464

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Back DL, Young DA, Shimmin AJ (2005) How do serum cobalt and chromium levels change after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing? Clin Orthop 438:177–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Daniel J, Ziaee H, Salama A, Pradhan C, McMinn DJ (2006) The effect of the diameter of metal-on-metal bearings on systemic exposure to cobalt and chromium. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(4):443–448

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Via G.C. Pupilli 1, I-40136, Bologna, Italy

    S. Giannini, A. Moroni, M. Romagnoli & M. Cadossi

Authors
  1. S. Giannini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Moroni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Romagnoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Cadossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Giannini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Giannini, S., Moroni, A., Romagnoli, M. et al. Hip resurfacing: mid-term results of the last-generation metal-on-metal devices. J Orthopaed Traumatol 8, 202–206 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-007-0094-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-007-0094-8

Key words