Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Total hip replacement comparison between the McKee-Farrar and Charnley prostheses in a 5-year follow-up study

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Archives of orthopaedic and traumatic surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

In a prospective study, 177 patients who underwent total hip replacement by the McKee-Farrar or Charnley techniques were followed up for 5 years with yearly clinical examinations, walking tests, and X-rays. The findings concerning pain, walking ability, and complications were satisfactory and similar to the inventors' own 5-year results. Comparison between the two techniques disclosed no major differences. Over 90% of the patients were free from pain; the infection rate was 3.4% and the loosening rate 6%. A walking test showed marked increase in speed over the first few years and a slight decrease after the third year. Our findings do not support the hypothesis that the metal-on-metal prosthesis is clinically inferior to the metal-on-polyethylene prosthesis.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahlo A, Søreide O, Bjersand AT (1984) Mechanical factors in loosening of Christiansen and Charnley arthroplasties. Acta Orthop Scand 55:261–266

    Google Scholar 

  2. Andersson G (1972) Hip assessment: a comparison of nine different methods. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 54:621–625

    Google Scholar 

  3. Andersson G, Möller-Nielsen J (1972) Results after arthroplasty of the hip with Moore's prosthesis. Acta Orthop Scand 43:397–410

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bentley G, Duthie RB (1973) A comparative study of the McKee-Farrar and Charnley total hip prostheses. Clin Orthop 95:127–142

    Google Scholar 

  5. Charnley J (1960) Anchorage of the femoral head prosthesis to the shaft of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 42:28–30

    Google Scholar 

  6. Charnley J (1972) The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 54:61–76

    Google Scholar 

  7. Charnley J (1979) Low-friction arthroplasty of the hip. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Coventry MB, Sauffer RN (1982) Long-term results of total hip arthroplasty. Hip 34–41

  9. D'Aubigné RM, Postel M (1954) Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 36:451–475

    Google Scholar 

  10. Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 51:737–755

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harris WH, McCarthy JG Jr, O'Neil DA (1982) Loosening of the femoral component of THR after plugging at the femoral canal. Hip 228–238

  12. Harris WH, White RE Jr (1982) Socket fixation using a metal-backed acetabular component for THR. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 64:745–748

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hierton C, Blomgren G, Lindgren U (1983) Factors associated with early loosening of cemented total hip prosthesis. Acta Orthop Scand 54:168–173

    Google Scholar 

  14. Larson CB (1963) Rating scale for hip disabilities. Clin Orthop 31:85–93

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lindberg HD, Carlsson AS (1983) Mechanical loosening of the femoral component in THR, Brunswik design. Acta Orthop Scand 54:557–561

    Google Scholar 

  16. McKee GK (1982) Total hip replacement - past, present and future. Biomaterials 3:130–135

    Google Scholar 

  17. McKee GK, Chen SC (1973) The statistics of the McKee-Farrar method of THR. Clin Orthop 95:26–37

    Google Scholar 

  18. Olsson S, Jernberger A, Tryggö D (1981) Clinical and radiological long-term results after Charnley-Müller THR. Acta Orthop Scand 52:531–542

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sheldon RS, Boston IL, Rose RM, Radin EL (1975) “Stiction-Friction” of total hip prosthesis and its relationship to loosening. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 57:226–230

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shepherd MM (1954) Assessment of function after arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 36:354–363

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sudman E, Havelin LL Lunde OD, Rait M (1983) The Charnley versus the Christiansen total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 54:545–552

    Google Scholar 

  22. Surin VV, Sundholm K (1983) Survival of patients and prostheses after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 177:148–153

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tillberg B (1974) Prophylaxis of postoperative venous thrombosis. Acta Orthop Scand [Suppl] 158

  24. Tillberg B (1982) Total hip arthroplasty using the McKeeWatson-Farrar prosthesis. Acta Orthop Scand 53:103–107

    Google Scholar 

  25. Weber BG (1981) Total hip replacement: rotating versus fixed and metal versus ceramic heads. Hip 264–275

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital, S-58185, Linköping, Sweden

    K. Djerf & O. Wahlström

Authors
  1. K. Djerf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. O. Wahlström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Djerf, K., Wahlström, O. Total hip replacement comparison between the McKee-Farrar and Charnley prostheses in a 5-year follow-up study. Arch. Orth. Traum. Surg. 105, 158–162 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00433934

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00433934

Keywords

Search

Navigation