Birmingham hip resurfacing at a mean of ten years: results from an independent centre.

Melbourne Orthopaedic Group, 33 The Avenue Windsor, Melbourne 3181, Australia.
The Bone & Joint Journal (Impact Factor: 2.8). 03/2012; 94(3):315-21. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B3.28185
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We report the findings of an independent review of 230 consecutive Birmingham hip resurfacings (BHRs) in 213 patients (230 hips) at a mean follow-up of 10.4 years (9.6 to 11.7). A total of 11 hips underwent revision; six patients (six hips) died from unrelated causes; and 13 patients (16 hips) were lost to follow-up. The survival rate for the whole cohort was 94.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.1 to 96.9). The survival rate in women was 89.1% (95% CI 79.2 to 94.4) and in men was 97.5% (95% CI 92.4 to 99.2). Women were 1.4 times more likely to suffer failure than men. For each millimetre increase in component size there was a 19% lower chance of a failure. The mean Oxford hip score was 45.0 (median 47.0, 28 to 48); mean University of California, Los Angeles activity score was 7.4 (median 8.0, 3 to 9); mean patient satisfaction score was 1.4 (median 1.0, 0 to 9). A total of eight hips had lysis in the femoral neck and two hips had acetabular lysis. One hip had progressive radiological changes around the peg of the femoral component. There was no evidence of progressive neck narrowing between five and ten years. Our results confirm that BHR provides good functional outcome and durability for men, at a mean follow-up of ten years. We are now reluctant to undertake hip resurfacing in women with this implant.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction High short-term failure rates have been reported for a variety of metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacements (THRs) owing to adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). This has led to the withdrawal of certain poorly performing THRs. This study analysed the outcomes of a MoM THR system. Methods Between 2004 and 2010, 578 uncemented MoM THRs (511 patients, mean age: 60.0 years) were implanted at one specialist centre. The THR system used consisted of the Corail® stem, Pinnacle® cup, Ultamet® liner and Articul/eze® femoral head (all DePuy, Leeds, UK). All patients were recalled for clinical review with imaging performed as necessary. Results The mean follow-up duration was 5.0 years (range: 1.0‐9.1 years). Overall, 39 hips (6.7%) in 38 patients (all 36mm femoral head size) underwent revision at a mean time of 3.5 years (range: 0.01‐8.3 years) from the index THR with 30 revisions (77%) performed in women. The cumulative eight-year survival rate for all THRs was 88.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.5‐93.4%), with no difference (p=0.053) between male (95.2%, 95% CI: 84.2‐98.7%) and female patients (85.3%, 95% CI: 70.2‐92.1%) at eight years. Seventeen revisions (44%) were performed for ARMD. There was no significant difference in absolute postoperative Oxford hip scores between men and women (p=0.608). The mean acetabular inclination in unrevised THRs was 44.0°. Forty-seven non-revised THRs (8.7%) had blood metal ion concentrations above recommended thresholds (seven had periprosthetic effusions). Conclusions Although this MoM THR system has not failed as dramatically as other similar designs, we recommend against continued use and advise regular clinical surveillance to identify ARMD early.
    Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 10/2014; 96(7). · 1.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the gold standard in the treatment of degenerative hip disease, especially in the older patient. Concerns regarding the higher levels of failure of traditional implants in younger, more active patients have led to a search for alternative arthroplasty techniques. Hip resurfacing (HR) is one of these alternatives. When compared with THA, HR has some theoretical advantages that stem from preservation of the patient’s normal proximal femoral anatomy and the use of a large diameter metal on metal bearing. This has the potential to more accurately replicate physiological hip function, reduce the risk of dislocation and allow higher levels of activity with minimal wear of the articulating surface. In addition, the preservation of proximal femoral bone stock offers the potential for easier revision options as would inevitably be required in younger patients. In order to be considered a suitable alternative, HR would need to demonstrate improvements or at least equivalence in functional outcomes and survivorship along with evidence of successful preservation of bone stock leading to good outcomes from future revision surgery. Whilst the recent expansion of data both in the orthopaedic literature and the mainstream media concerning the potentially devastating problems from large metal-on-metal (MoM) bearings in some settings carries some salient lessons for both the development, marketing and uptake of new orthopaedic implants, it should be put in the context of the resurfacing literature as a whole. In this review we aim to review the current evidence base for HR compared with THA and examine the current indications for the procedure.
    Orthopedic and Muscular System. 11/2014; 3(3):173.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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.
    The bone & joint journal. 10/2014; 96-B(10):1298-306.