Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Midterm results of the Birmingham hip resurfacing: a single-surgeon series

  • Hip Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) is readily used as alternative to total hip replacement in younger patients. The current study aims to compare outcomes in terms of adverse local tissue reactions (ALTR), elevated metal ion levels and survival rates between low-risk (femoral component size ≥ 48 mm) and high-risk (femoral component size < 48 mm) BHR patients at a minimum 5-year follow-up (FU).

Materials and methods

We report the minimum 5-year, single surgeon outcome results of 183 BHRs, performed between 2007 and 2012. 154 patients, 18 women (20 hips) and 136 men (163 hips) were included in the study. Patients were grouped in 149 low-risk cases (femoral component size ≥ 48 mm) and in 34 high-risk cases (18 female/12 male) patients with a femoral head size < 48 mm).

Results

At a minimum of 5-years FU time, 91% of the patients were available for FU. The overall survival rate was 91.8%. There were five revisions (survival rate 96.6%) in the low-risk group and ten revisions (survival rate 70.6%) in the high-risk group. In the low-risk group, six patients (6.5%) showed elevated metal ion levels (> 7 μg/l), compared to five patients (20.8%) in the high risk-group (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Including the surgeon’s initial learning curve, the BHR shows very good mid-term survival rates in the low-risk group but should, as previously demonstrated, not be considered for patients with less than 48 mm femoral head size.

Level of evidence

Level III: retrospective cohort study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (2012) Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (2012). Medicaldevice alert: all metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/. Accessed 12 Mar 2017

  2. Amstutz HC, Duff MJL (2019) Effects of physical activity on long-term survivorship after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Bone Jt J 101-B(10):1186–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson H, Toms AP, Cahir JG, Goodwin RW, Wimhurst J, Nolan JF (2011) Grading the severity of soft tissue changes associated with metal-on-metal hip replacements: reliability of an MR grading system. Skeletal Radiol 40(3):303–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berkowitz JL, Potter HG (2017) Advanced MRI techniques for the hip joint: focus on the postoperative hip. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209(3):534–543

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Coulter G, Young DA, Dalziel RE, Shimmin AJ (2012) Birmingham hip resurfacing at a mean of ten years: results from an independent centre. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94(3):315–321

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Daniel J, Pradhan C, Ziaee H, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJ (2014) Results of Birmingham hip resurfacing at 12 to 15 years: a single-surgeon series. Bone Jt J 96-B(10):1298–1306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Davies AP, Willert HG, Campbell PA, Learmonth ID, Case CP (2005) An unusual lymphocytic perivascular infiltration in tissues around contemporary metal-on-metal joint replacements. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87(1):18–27

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. De Pasquale D, Stea S, Squarzoni S et al (2014) Metal-on-metal hip prostheses: correlation between debris in the synovial fluid and levels of cobalt and chromium ions in the bloodstream. Int Orthop 38(3):469–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Engh CA, MacDonald SJ, Sritulanondha S, Korczak A, Naudie D, Engh C (2014) Metal ion levels after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: a five-year, prospective randomized trial. J Bone Jt Surg Am 96(6):448–455

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Girard J, Lons A, Pommepuy T, Isida R, Benad K, Putman S (2017) High-impact sport after hip resurfacing: the Ironman triathlon. Orthopaed Traumatol Surg Res 103(5):675–678

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Grammatopoulos G, Pandit H, Kwon YM et al (2009) Hip resurfacings revised for inflammatory pseudotumour have a poor outcome. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91(8):1019–1024

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hart AJ, Sabah SA, Bandi AS et al (2011) Sensitivity and specificity of blood cobalt and chromium metal ions for predicting failure of metal-on-metal hip replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br 93(10):1308–1313

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hart AJ, Sabah SA, Sampson B et al (2014) Surveillance of patients with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and total hip prostheses: a prospective cohort study to investigate the relationship between blood metal ion levels and implant failure. J Bone Jt Surg Am 96(13):1091–1099

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Heisel C, Silva M, Skipor AK, Jacobs JJ, Schmalzried TP (2005) The relationship between activity and ions in patients with metal-on-metal bearing hip prostheses. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87(4):781–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Issa K, Palich A, Tatevossian T, Kapadia BH, Naziri Q, Mont MA (2013) The outcomes of hip resurfacing compared to standard primary total hip arthroplasty in Men. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 14:161

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Jameson SS, Baker PN, Mason J, Porter ML, Deehan DJ, Reed MR (2012) Independent predictors of revision following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: a retrospective cohort study using National Joint Registry data. J Bone Jt Surg Br 94(6):746–754

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Johanson PE, Fenstad AM, Furnes O et al (2010) Inferior outcome after hip resurfacing arthroplasty than after conventional arthroplasty. Evidence from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, 1995 to 2007. Acta Orthop 81(5):535–541

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Keegan GM, Learmonth ID, Case CP (2007) Orthopaedic metals and their potential toxicity in the arthroplasty patient: a review of current knowledge and future strategies. J Bone Jt Surg Br 89(5):567–573

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kwon YM, Ostlere SJ, McLardy-Smith P, Athanasou NA, Gill HS, Murray DW (2011) “Asymptomatic” pseudotumors after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: prevalence and metal ion study. J Arthroplasty 26(4):511–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ladon D, Doherty A, Newson R, Turner J, Bhamra M, Case CP (2004) Changes in metal levels and chromosome aberrations in the peripheral blood of patients after metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19(8 Suppl 3):78–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Loppini M, Grappiolo G (2018) Uncemented short stems in primary total hip arthroplasty: the state of the art. EFORT Open Rev 3(5):149–159

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. MacDonald SJ (2004) Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: the concerns. Clin Orthop Relat Res 429:86–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Matharu GS, Berryman F, Judge A et al (2017) Blood metal ion thresholds to identify patients with metal-on-metal hip implants at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris: an external multicenter validation study of Birmingham hip resurfacing and corail-pinnacle implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99(18):1532–1539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Matharu GS, McBryde CW, Pynsent WB, Pynsent PB, Treacy RB (2013) The outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing in patients aged < 50 years up to 14 years post-operatively. Bone Jt J 95-b(9):1172–1177

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Matharu GS, Mellon SJ, Murray DW, Pandit HG (2015) Follow-up of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients is currently not evidence based or cost effective. J Arthroplasty 30(8):1317–1323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. McBryde CW, Theivendran K, Thomas AM, Treacy RB, Pynsent PB (2010) The influence of head size and sex on the outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing. J Bone Jt Surg Am 92(1):105–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. McLawhorn AS, Buller LT, Blevins JL, Lee YY, Su EP (2020) What Are the benefits of hip resurfacing in appropriate patients? A retrospective, propensity score-matched analysis. HSS J 16(Suppl 2):316–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Migaud H, Jobin A, Chantelot C, Giraud F, Laffargue P, Duquennoy A (2004) Cementless metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in patients less than 50 years of age: comparison with a matched control group using ceramic-on-polyethylene after a minimum 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 19(8 Suppl 3):23–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Munro JT, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS (2014) High complication rate after revision of large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(2):523–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Murray DW, Grammatopoulos G, Pandit H, Gundle R, Gill HS, McLardy-Smith P (2012) The ten-year survival of the Birmingham hip resurfacing: an independent series. J Bone Jt Surg Br 94(9):1180–1186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Prosser GH, Yates PJ, Wood DJ, Graves SE, de Steiger RN, Miller LN (2010) Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision. Acta Orthop 81(1):66–71

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Ras Sørensen SL, Jørgensen HL, Sporing SL, Lauritzen JB (2016) Revision rates for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty—a systematic review. Hip Int 26(6):515–521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Reito A, Moilanen T, Puolakka T, Pajamaki J, Eskelinen A (2014) Repeated metal ion measurements in patients with high risk metal-on-metal hip replacement. Int Orthop 38(7):1353–1361

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Reito A, Puolakka T, Elo P, Pajamaki J, Eskelinen A (2014) Outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing at ten years: role of routine whole blood metal ion measurements in screening for pseudotumours. Int Orthop 38(11):2251–2257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rueckl K, Liebich A, Bechler U, Springer B, Rudert M, Boettner F (2020) Return to sports after hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a mid-term case control study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140(7):957–962

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sershon R, Balkissoon R, Valle CJ (2016) Current indications for hip resurfacing arthroplasty in 2016. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 9(1):84–92

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Stavrakis AI, Khoshbin A, Joseph A et al (2020) Dual mobility total hip arthroplasty is not associated with a greater incidence of groin pain in comparison with conventional total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing: a retrospective comparative Study. HSS J 16(Suppl 2):394–399

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Stoney J, Graves SE, de Steiger RN, Rainbird S, Kelly TL, Hatton A (2020) Is the survivorship of Birmingham hip resurfacing better than selected conventional hip arthroplasties in men younger than 65 years of age? A Study from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 478(11):2625–2636

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A et al (2005) Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(1):28–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Ziaee H, Daniel J, Datta AK, Blunt S, McMinn DJ (2007) Transplacental transfer of cobalt and chromium in patients with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(3):301–305

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hospital for Special Surgery, Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA

    Richard Lass, Ulrich Bechler, Bernhard Springer, Kilian Rueckl, Carola Hanreich & Friedrich Boettner

  2. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria

    Richard Lass & Bernhard Springer

  3. Department of Orthopedics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    Ulrich Bechler

  4. Orthopedic Clinic König-Ludwig-Haus, University of Wuerzburg, Würzburg, Germany

    Kilian Rueckl

Authors
  1. Richard Lass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulrich Bechler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernhard Springer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kilian Rueckl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carola Hanreich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Friedrich Boettner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Friedrich Boettner.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

Senior Author is consultant for Smith & Nephew, OrthoDevelopment, DePuy and Medtronic and receives Royalties from Smith & Nephew and OrthoDevelopment. Remaining authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the local Institutional Review Board of the senior author’s institution.

Informed consent

Due to the retrospective design of the study, it was not necessary to obtain informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lass, R., Bechler, U., Springer, B. et al. Midterm results of the Birmingham hip resurfacing: a single-surgeon series. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 143, 1041–1048 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-04305-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-04305-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation