Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, 500 Parnassus, MU 320W, San Francisco, CA 94143-0728, USA.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.77). 03/2010; 468(9):2301-12. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1301-0
Source: PubMed


Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) may offer potential advantages over total hip arthroplasty (THA) for certain patients with advanced osteoarthritis of the hip. However, the cost effectiveness of MoM HRA compared with THA is unclear.
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MoM HRA to THA.
A Markov decision model was constructed to compare the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with HRA versus THA from the healthcare system perspective over a 30-year time horizon. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of patient characteristics, clinical outcome probabilities, quality of life and costs on the discounted incremental costs, incremental clinical effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HRA compared to THA.
MoM HRA was associated with modest improvements in QALYs at a small incremental cost, and had an ICER less than $50,000 per QALY gained for men younger than 65 and for women younger than 55. MoM HRA and THA failure rates, device costs, and the difference in quality of life after conversion from HRA to THA compared to primary THA had the largest impact on costs and quality of life.
MoM HRA could be clinically advantageous and cost-effective in younger men and women. Further research on the comparative effectiveness of MoM HRA versus THA should include assessments of the quality of life and resource use in addition to the clinical outcomes associated with both procedures.
Level I, economic and decision analysis. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Available from: Kevin Bozic
  • Source
    • "Recent bearing material improvements have made HRA a viable option once again, particularly in younger and more active patients or those ineligible for THA. Nonetheless, the safety of MoM HRA remains controversial, with complications including femoral neck fractures, component loosening, and metallosis [5] [6] [8] [9]. Despite these concerns and limited evidence regarding revision surgery, the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry reports an increasing trend in the number of MoM HRAs in Canada (o1% of all types of hip replacement in 2003 to 3% in 2007) [10] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) has emerged as an alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA) for younger active patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Birmingham hip resurfacing is the most common MoM HRA in Alberta, and is therefore compared with conventional THA. The objective of this study was to estimate the expected cost-utility of MoM HRA versus THA, in younger patients with OA, using a decision analytic model with a 15-year time horizon. A probabilistic Markov decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the expected cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of MoM HRA versus THA from a health care payer perspective. The base case considered patients with OA aged 50 years; men comprised 65.9% of the cohort. Sensitivity analyses evaluated cohort age, utility values, failure probabilities, and treatment costs. Data were derived from the Hip Improvement Project and the Hip and Knee Replacement Pilot databases in Alberta, the 2010 National Joint Replacement Registry of the Australian Orthopaedic Association, and the literature. In the base case, THA was dominated by MoM HRA (incremental mean costs of -$583 and incremental mean QALYs of 0.079). In subgroup analyses, THA remained dominated when cohort age was 40 years instead of 50 years or when only men were assessed. THA dominated when the cohort age was 60 years or when only women were assessed. Results were sensitive to utilities, surgery costs, and MoM HRA revision and conversion probabilities. At a willingness-to-pay of Can $50,000/QALY, there was a 58% probability that MoM HRA is cost-effective. The results show that, on average, MoM HRA was preferred to THA for younger and male patients, but THA is still a reasonable option if the patient or clinician prefers given the small absolute differences between the options and the confidence ellipses around the cost-effectiveness estimates.
    Value in Health 09/2013; 16(6):942-52. DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2013.06.021 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • Source

    The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 12/2010; 92(18):2959-72. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.J.00851 · 5.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a concept of hip replacement that allows treating young active patients with a femoral bone preserving procedure. The proposed advantages of resuming an active lifestyle with increased frequency and duration of sports activities have been shown to be realistic. The 30-year cost-effectiveness in young male patients has been shown to be higher in resurfacing compared to conventional total hip replacement (THA). However, prognosticators of an inferior outcome have also been identified. The most important patient related factors are secondary osteoarthritis as the indication for surgery such as post-childhood hip disorders or AVN, female gender, smaller component sizes and older age (>65 years for males and >55 years for females). In addition, surgical technique (approach and cementing technique) and component design are also important determinant factors for the risk of failure. Moreover, concerns have surfaced with respect to high metal ion concentrations and metal ion hypersensitivities. In addition, the presumed ease of revising HRA has not reflected in improved or equal survivorship in comparison to a primary THA. This highlights the importance of identifying patient-, surgery-, and implant-related prognosticators for success or failure of HRA. Rather than vilifying the concept of hip resurfacing, detailed in depth analysis should be used to specify indications and improve implant design and surgical techniques.
    European cells & materials 01/2011; 21:243-58. · 4.89 Impact Factor
Show more