Literature DB >> 19779950

The learning curve for adopting hip resurfacing among hip specialists.

Ryan M Nunley1, Jinjun Zhu, Peter J Brooks, C Anderson Engh, Stephen J Raterman, John S Rogerson, Robert L Barrack.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Patient demand and surgeon interest in hip resurfacing has recently increased, but surgeons in the United States are relatively inexperienced with this procedure. We determined the learning curve associated with hip resurfacing and compared the rate of early complications of the first 650 hip resurfacings between five experienced hip surgeons and a national safety survey database study we previously published, which included 89 surgeons and 537 hip resurfacings. Patient demographics and adverse events were recorded. Specific features on pre- and postoperative radiographs were measured in a blinded fashion by a single observer. There were 13 major complications (2.0%), which is 3.7 times lower than our national safety survey complication rate of 7.4%. All fractures occurred in the first 25 cases performed. The complication rate was higher for the first 25 procedures (5.6%) compared with the second 25 procedures (1.6%). For experienced hip surgeons, the learning curve for avoiding early complications was short, 25 cases or less. The learning curve for achieving the desired component positioning radiographically was much longer, 75 to 100 cases or more. If achieving some ideal component position proves important for long-term function and implant survival, improved instrumentation and surgical techniques would be necessary to shorten the learning curve. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19779950      PMCID: PMC2807001          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-1106-1

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


  48 in total

1.  Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip.

Authors:  Paul E Beaulé; Frederick J Dorey; Michel J Le Duff; Michel LeDuff; Thomas Gruen; Harlan C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Learning from the learning curve in total hip resurfacing: a radiographic analysis.

Authors:  Suzanne Witjes; José M H Smolders; Paul E Beaulé; Pieternel Pasker; Job L C Van Susante
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2009-04-21       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Painful impingement of the hip joint after total hip resurfacing: a report of two cases.

Authors:  Martin Lavigne; Krishna R Boddu Siva Rama; Alain Roy; Pascal-André Vendittoli
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-01-24       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: the effect of cup position and component size on range of motion to impingement.

Authors:  Dan Williams; Matt Royle; Mark Norton
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-09-27       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Position of hip resurfacing component affects strain and resistance to fracture in the femoral neck.

Authors:  Thomas Parker Vail; Richard R Glisson; David E Dominguez; Kenichi Kitaoka; Danielle Ottaviano
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Harlan C Amstutz; Paul E Beaulé; Frederick J Dorey; Michel J Le Duff; Pat A Campbell; Thomas A Gruen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 7.  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

8.  Initial American experience with hip resurfacing following FDA approval.

Authors:  Craig J Della Valle; Ryan M Nunley; Stephen J Raterman; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-24       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Acetabular polyethylene wear and acetabular inclination and femoral offset.

Authors:  Nick J Little; Constant A Busch; John A Gallagher; Cecil H Rorabeck; Robert B Bourne
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-02       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Cup inclination angle of greater than 50 degrees increases whole blood concentrations of cobalt and chromium ions after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.

Authors:  A J Hart; P Buddhdev; P Winship; N Faria; J J Powell; J A Skinner
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2008 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.756

View more
  25 in total

1.  [Durom™ hip resurfacing. Short- to midterm clinical and radiological outcome].

Authors:  J Goronzy; M Stiehler; S Kirschner; K-P Günther
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  2011 Marshall Urist Young Investigator Award: when to release patients to high-impact activities after hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Katherine M Bedigrew; Erin L Ruh; Qin Zhang; John C Clohisy; Robert L Barrack; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  The future role of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Gulraj S Matharu; Hemant G Pandit; David W Murray; Ronan B C Treacy
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Avoiding short-term femoral neck fracture with imageless computer navigation for hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Michael Olsen; Emil H Schemitsch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Aspirin decreases heterotopic ossification after hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Ryan M Nunley; Jinjun Zhu; John C Clohisy; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Learning curve of basic hip arthroscopy technique: CUSUM analysis.

Authors:  Young-Kyun Lee; Yong-Chan Ha; Deuk-Soo Hwang; Kyung-Hoi Koo
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  An initial experience with hip resurfacing versus cementless total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Justin Michael Arndt; Glenn D Wera; Victor M Goldberg
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2013-06-25

8.  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

9.  Do young, active patients perceive advantages after surface replacement compared to cementless total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Robert L Barrack; Erin L Ruh; Michael E Berend; Craig J Della Valle; C Anderson Engh; Javad Parvizi; John C Clohisy; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Adoption of hip resurfacing arthroplasty at hospital for special surgery: a cohort study.

Authors:  Edwin P Su; Sherwin L Su
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2012-09-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.