Literature DB >> 18941859

Is patient selection important for hip resurfacing?

Ryan M Nunley1, Craig J Della Valle, Robert L Barrack.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The optimal implant option for hip arthroplasty in the young, active patient remains controversial. There has been renewed interest for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing due to improved design and manufacturing of implants, better materials, enhanced implant fixation, theoretical advantages over conventional total hip arthroplasty, and recent Food and Drug Administration approval of two devices. Recent studies indicate satisfactory short- and midterm clinical results (1- to 10-year followup) with low complication rates, but there is a learning curve associated with this procedure, a more extensive surgical approach is necessary, and long-term results have yet to be determined. Proper patient selection may help avoid complications and improve patient outcomes. Patient selection criteria in the literature appear based predominantly on theoretical considerations without any consensus on stratifying patient risk. The most commonly reported complications encountered with hip resurfacing include femoral neck fracture, acetabular component loosening, metal hypersensitivity, dislocation, and nerve injury. At the time of clinical evaluation, patient age; gender; diagnosis; bone density, quality, and morphology; activity level; leg lengths; renal function; and metal hypersensitivity are important factors when considering a patient for hip resurfacing. Based on our review, we believe the best candidates for hip resurfacing are men under age 65 with osteoarthritis and relatively normal bony morphology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18941859      PMCID: PMC2601008          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-008-0558-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  83 in total

1.  Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  J Girard; M Lavigne; P-A Vendittoli; A G Roy
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-06

2.  The femoral head/neck offset and hip resurfacing.

Authors:  P E Beaulé; N Harvey; E Zaragoza; M J Le Duff; F J Dorey
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-01

Review 3.  Femoral component sizing and positioning in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Paul E Beaulé; Philippe Poitras
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  2007

4.  Duration of symptoms and outcome of hemiresurfacing for hip osteonecrosis.

Authors:  P E Beaulé; T P Schmalzried; P Campbell; F Dorey; H C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michael A Mont; Phillip S Ragland; Gracia Etienne; Thorsten M Seyler; Thomas P Schmalzried
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.020

6.  THARIES surface replacements: a review of the first 100 cases.

Authors:  H C Amstutz; A Graff-Radford; T A Gruen; I C Clarke
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1978 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Transplacental transfer of cobalt and chromium in patients with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a controlled study.

Authors:  H Ziaee; J Daniel; A K Datta; S Blunt; D J W McMinn
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-03

8.  The results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings at a mean of five years. An independent prospective review of the first 230 hips.

Authors:  C B Hing; D L Back; M Bailey; D A Young; R E Dalziel; A J Shimmin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-11

9.  Use of metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

Authors:  Michael A Mont; Thorsten M Seyler; David R Marker; German A Marulanda; Ronald E Delanois
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Resurfacing for Perthes disease: an alternative to standard hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Harold S Boyd; Slif D Ulrich; Thorsten M Seyler; German A Marulanda; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  28 in total

1.  Bone mineral density in the femoral neck increases after hip resurfacing: a cohort with five-year follow-up.

Authors:  Charles A Willis-Owen; Henry D Atkinson; Roger D Oakeshott
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-08-22       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  The learning curve for adopting hip resurfacing among hip specialists.

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Jinjun Zhu; Peter J Brooks; C Anderson Engh; Stephen J Raterman; John S Rogerson; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  What is the midterm survivorship and function after hip resurfacing?

Authors:  Luthfur Rahman; Sarah K Muirhead-Allwood; Muhannad Alkinj
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The 2012 Otto Aufranc Award: The interpretation of metal ion levels in unilateral and bilateral hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Catherine Van Der Straeten; George Grammatopoulos; Harinderjit S Gill; Alessandro Calistri; Patricia Campbell; Koen A De Smet
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Is mid-head resection a durable conservative option in the presence of poor femoral bone quality and distorted anatomy?

Authors:  Derek J W McMinn; Chandra Pradhan; Hena Ziaee; Joseph Daniel
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Recovery expectations of hip resurfacing compared to total hip arthroplasty: a matched pairs study.

Authors:  Hassan M K Ghomrawi; Mark M Dolan; John Rutledge; Michael M Alexiades
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.794

Review 7.  Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: an analysis of safety and revision rates.

Authors:  S Sehatzadeh; K Kaulback; L Levin
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2012-08-01

Review 8.  Hip replacement in femoral head osteonecrosis: current concepts.

Authors:  Michelangelo Scaglione; Luca Fabbri; Fabio Celli; Francesco Casella; Giulio Guido
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2016-04-07

9.  Accuracy of computer-assisted navigation for femoral head resurfacing decreases in hips with abnormal anatomy.

Authors:  Rocco P Pitto; Sharif Malak; Iain A Anderson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Conversion of a failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty: pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Jacob A Haynes; Jeffrey B Stambough; Robert L Barrack; Denis Nam
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.