Literature DB >> 15833457

Metal-on-metal resurfacing versus total hip replacement-the value of a randomized clinical trial.

Donald W Howie1, Margaret A McGee, Kerry Costi, Stephen E Graves.   

Abstract

This article describes a randomized clinical trial in young patients, comparing metal-on-metal cemented resurfacing hip replacement with cemented total hip replacement. The trial was stopped early, mainly because of a high incidence of failure of the cemented resurfacing acetabular component. The results reinforce the importance of clinical trials for evaluating the safety and efficacy of prosthesis designs before being used in a large cohort of patients. Although there may be advantages of resurfacing hip replacement, trials are also required to demonstrate it has a midterm success that reasonably approaches that of total hip replacement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15833457     DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2004.12.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am        ISSN: 0030-5898            Impact factor:   2.472


  12 in total

1.  Hip resurfacing: why does it fail? Early results and critical analysis of our first 60 cases.

Authors:  F Falez; F Favetti; F Casella; G Panegrossi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: An Evidence-Based Analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2006-02-01

Review 3.  Is patient selection important for hip resurfacing?

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Craig J Della Valle; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Metal-on-Metal Bearing: Is This the End of the Line? We Do Not Think So.

Authors:  Henri Migaud; Sophie Putman; Antoine Combes; Charles Berton; Donatien Bocquet; Laurent Vasseur; Julien Girard
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2012-09-11

Review 5.  Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes.

Authors:  Deborah A Marshall; Karen Pykerman; Jason Werle; Diane Lorenzetti; Tracy Wasylak; Tom Noseworthy; Donald A Dick; Greg O'Connor; Aish Sundaram; Sanne Heintzbergen; Cy Frank
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  The clinical and radiological outcomes of hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Toby O Smith; Rachel Nichols; Simon T Donell; Caroline B Hing
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 3.717

7.  Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large-head or standard total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jeannette Østergaard Penny; Ole Ovesen; Jens-Erik Varmarken; Søren Overgaard
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 3.717

8.  Reducing the failure rate of hip resurfacing in dysplasia patients: a retrospective analysis of 363 cases.

Authors:  Melissa D Gaillard; Thomas P Gross
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 9.  Increased Mortality in Metal-on-Metal versus Non-Metal-on-Metal Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty at 10 Years and Longer Follow-Up: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  B G Pijls; J M T A Meessen; J W Schoones; M Fiocco; H J L van der Heide; A Sedrakyan; R G H H Nelissen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Balancing innovation and medical device regulation: the case of modern metal-on-metal hip replacements.

Authors:  Jason J Howard
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2016-08-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.