Literature DB >> 30672350

An 18-year comparison of hybrid total hip replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing in active young patients.

Sam C Jonas1, Michael R Whitehouse1,2, Simon Bick1, Gordon C Bannister1,2, Richard P Baker1.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the long-term clinical and radiological results of metal-on-polyethylene hybrid total hip replacement (THA) with metal-on-metal Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) in young, active patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the 1st consecutive 63 hips in young, active patients who underwent BHR by the senior author, 54 (51 patients) were matched to patients who had undergone THA with regard to age, gender, body mass index and preoperative levels of activity. Radiologically, all hips were assessed for migration and osteolysis, THAs for polyethylene wear and BHRs for a pedestal sign. Patient-reported outcomes, mortality and revision rates were compared.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up of the patients with a hybrid THR was 19.9 years and for those with a BHR, 17.6 years. 13 patients with a hybrid THR and 5 with a BHR had died. 1 hybrid THR and 3 BHRs were lost to follow-up. The revision rate of the hybrid THRs was 14/54 and of the BHRs 6/54. Log rank comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival estimates demonstrated a significantly lower mortality in the BHR group (p = 0.039; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37 [95% CI, 0.15-0.95]) but a non-significant difference in revision rates (p = 0.067; HR = 0.43 [95% CI, 0.18-1.06]). The BHRs recorded superior OHS (p = 0.03), UCLA (p = 0.0096), and EuroQol visual analogue scores (p = 0.03). Significantly more BHRs had run, played sport and undertaken heavy manual labour in the month preceding follow-up.
CONCLUSION: After 18 years, patients with BHRs remained more active with a lower mortality rate but demonstrated no significant difference in revision rates. Both groups demonstrated progressive radiological changes at long-term follow-up.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cohort study; hip resurfacing; hybrid hip replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30672350     DOI: 10.1177/1120700018814710

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hip Int        ISSN: 1120-7000            Impact factor:   2.135


  6 in total

1.  Effects of continuous nursing based on WeChat platform on the functional recovery and quality of life in elderly patients after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Juan Liu; Qiuyan Zhao; Juan Wang; Jing Zhang; Juan Jiang; Haoyu Wang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 4.060

2.  Changes in Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Hip Fractures Following the Initiation of Orthogeriatric Service: Temporal Trend Analysis.

Authors:  Ben Fluck; Keefai Yeong; Radcliffe Lisk; Hazel Watters; Jonathan Robin; David Fluck; Christopher H Fry; Thang S Han
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Amount and type of physical activity and sports from one year forward after hip or knee arthroplasty-A systematic review.

Authors:  Yvet Mooiweer; Inge van den Akker-Scheek; Martin Stevens
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Birmingham Hip Resurfacing for osteoarthritis - a Canadian retrospective cohort study with a minimum 10-year follow-up.

Authors:  Jonathan Bourget-Murray; Scott J Watt Kearns; Sophie Piroozfar; Jayd Lukenchuk; Kelly Johnston; Jason Werle
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2022-05-03       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Is the Survivorship of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Better Than Selected Conventional Hip Arthroplasties in Men Younger Than 65 Years of Age? A Study from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

Authors:  James Stoney; Stephen E Graves; Richard N de Steiger; Sophia Rainbird; Thu-Lan Kelly; Alesha Hatton
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-11       Impact factor: 4.755

6.  Gait after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: an age-matched controlled prospective study.

Authors:  Anatole V Wiik; Rhiannon Lambkin; Justin P Cobb
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 5.082

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.