Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

, Volume 467, Issue 1, pp 94–100 | Cite as

Surface Replacement is Comparable to Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

  • Mike S. McGrath
  • David R. Marker
  • Thorsten M. Seyler
  • Slif D. Ulrich
  • Michael A. Mont
Symposium: Papers Presented at the Hip Society Meetings 2008

Abstract

Conversion of a failed surface hip replacement to a conventional total hip arthroplasty is reportedly a straightforward procedure with excellent results. We compared perioperative parameters, complications, and clinical as well as radiographic outcomes of 39 hemi and total hip resurfacing conversions with conventional THAs. The hips were matched by diagnosis, gender, age, body mass index, preoperative Harris hip score, and followup time to a cohort of primary conventional THAs performed during the same time period by the same surgeon. The mean operative time was longer (by 19 minutes) for the conversions, but other perioperative parameters were similar. At a mean followup of 45 months (range, 24–63 months), the mean Harris hip scores were similar in the two groups (92 points versus 94 points for the conversion and conventional hips, respectively). Thirty-eight of 39 stems were well-aligned and appeared osseointegrated. When a resurfaced hip fails, conversion to conventional THA has similar early clinical and radiographic outcomes to primary conventional THA.

Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic (retrospective comparative study). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

References

  1. 1.
    Adili A, Trousdale RT. Femoral head resurfacing for the treatment of osteonecrosis in the young patient. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;417:93–101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amstutz HC, Ball ST, Le Duff MJ, Dorey FJ. Resurfacing THA for patients younger than 50 year: results of 2- to 9-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;460:159–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amstutz HC, Beaulé PE, Dorey FJ, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:28–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amstutz HC, Grigoris P, Dorey FJ. Evolution and future of surface replacement of the hip. J Orthop Sci. 1998;3:169–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ball ST, Le Duff MJ, Amstutz HC. Early results of conversion of a failed femoral component in hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:735–741.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beaulé PE, Le Duff M, Campbell P, Dorey FJ, Park SH, Amstutz HC. Metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty with a cemented femoral component: a 7–10 year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:17–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beaulé PE, Schmalzried TP, Campbell P, Dorey F, Amstutz HC. Duration of symptoms and outcome of hemiresurfacing for hip osteonecrosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;385:104–117.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cuckler JM, Moore KD, Estrada L. Outcome of hemiresurfacing in osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:146–150.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    DeLee JG, Charnley J. Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;121:20–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grecula MJ. Resurfacing arthroplasty in osteonecrosis of the hip. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:231–242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grigoris P, Roberts P, Panousis K, Jin Z. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: the evolution of contemporary designs. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]. 2006;220:95–105.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:737–755.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hungerford MW, Mont MA, Scott R, Fiore C, Hungerford DS, Krackow KA. Surface replacement hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:1656–1664.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    MacDonald SJ. Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: the concerns. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:86–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marker DR, Seyler TM, Jinnah RH, Delanois RE, Ulrich SD, Mont MA. Femoral neck fractures after metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing: a prospective cohort study. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:66–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mont MA, Ragland PS, Etienne G, Seyler TM, Schmalzried TP. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14:454–463.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mont MA, Rajadhyaksha AD, Hungerford DS. Outcomes of limited femoral resurfacing arthroplasty compared with total hip arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:134–139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mont MA, Seyler TM, Marker DR, Marulanda GA, Delanois RE. Use of metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88 suppl 3:90–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mont MA, Seyler TM, Ulrich SD, Beaule PE, Boyd HS, Grecula MJ, Goldberg VM, Kennedy WR, Marker DR, Schmalzried TP, Sparling EA, Vail TP, Amstutz HC. Effect of changing indications and techniques on total hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;465:63–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nelson CL, Garrison RL, Walz BH, McLaren SG. Resurfacing of only the femoral head—treatment for young patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head with collapse, delamination and significant head involvement. J Ark Med Soc. 2003;100:162–163.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nelson CL, Walz BH, Gruenwald JM. Resurfacing of only the femoral head for osteonecrosis. Long-term follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12:736–740.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pollard TC, Baker RP, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, Bannister GC. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip. A five- to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:592–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schmalzried TP. Total resurfacing for osteonecrosis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:151–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Scott RD, Urse JS, Schmidt R, Bierbaum BE. Use of TARA hemiarthroplasty in advanced osteonecrosis. J Arthroplasty. 1987;2:225–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Silva M, Lee KH, Heisel C, Dela Rosa MA, Schmalzried TP. The biomechanical results of total hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:40–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vail TP, Mina CA, Yergler JD, Pietrobon R. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:123–131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mike S. McGrath
    • 1
  • David R. Marker
    • 1
  • Thorsten M. Seyler
    • 1
  • Slif D. Ulrich
    • 1
  • Michael A. Mont
    • 1
  1. 1.Rubin Institute for Advanced OrthopedicsSinai Hospital of BaltimoreBaltimore USA

Personalised recommendations