Skip to main content
Top
Published in: HSS Journal ® 1/2017

01-02-2017 | Global Tribology Summit

Hip Resurfacing: International Perspectives

Review Article

Author: Julien Girard, MD, PhD

Published in: HSS Journal ® | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The hip resurfacing concept was developed for young and active patients, especially for femoral bone stock preservation. However, concerns about metal-on-metal bearings with adverse reactions to metal debris have led to a drop off in hip-resurfacing procedures.

Questions/Purposes

The goal of this review is to evaluate our current knowledge of survivorship of second-generation hip resurfacing devices and elaborate international perspectives for product improvement.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search provided information on national joint arthroplasty registers worldwide with a minimum of 3000 reported hip resurfacings. It culminated in the analysis of six registers.

Results

Long-term data showed that available hip resurfacing device survivorship ranged from 95 to 99.7% with 10 years of follow-up, in selected patient populations. The criteria for success were well known, male gender, good bone quality, head component size greater than 48 mm, and cup inclination less than 45°. On the other hand, the recent recall of some hip-resurfacing devices has resulted in huge medico-legal problems and has discredited all implants. It has brought about the recent evolution of hip resurfacing. Femoral fixation is now available for cemented and cementless surfaces. Bearings are still always metal-on-metal, but new types have come on board. Newer designs suggest that ceramic-on-ceramic, cross-linked polyethylene, and oxinium may be applied in this configuration.

Conclusions

In 2015, the evolution of hip resurfacing is ongoing in terms of implant design, alternative bearings, and implant fixation with hopes of improving survivorship.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Amstutz HC, Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, et al. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two- to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86: 28-39.CrossRefPubMed Amstutz HC, Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, et al. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two- to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86: 28-39.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Asaad A, Hart A, Khoo MM, et al. Frequent femoral neck osteolysis with Birmingham mid-head resection resurfacing arthroplasty in young patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; S1: 1-9. Asaad A, Hart A, Khoo MM, et al. Frequent femoral neck osteolysis with Birmingham mid-head resection resurfacing arthroplasty in young patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; S1: 1-9.
4.
go back to reference Atrey A, Waite J, Hart A, et al. Failure of a ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing due to metallosis. JBJS Case Connect. 2014; 26, e28.CrossRef Atrey A, Waite J, Hart A, et al. Failure of a ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing due to metallosis. JBJS Case Connect. 2014; 26, e28.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff M, et al. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 418: 87-93.CrossRef Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff M, et al. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 418: 87-93.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bourne RB, Barrack R, Rorabeck CH, et al. Arthroplasty options for the young patient: oxinium on cross linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005; 441: 159-67.CrossRefPubMed Bourne RB, Barrack R, Rorabeck CH, et al. Arthroplasty options for the young patient: oxinium on cross linked polyethylene. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005; 441: 159-67.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Canadian Hip Resurfacing Group. A survey on the prevalence of pseudotumours with MoM hip resurfacings in Canadian academic centres. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 118-21.CrossRef Canadian Hip Resurfacing Group. A survey on the prevalence of pseudotumours with MoM hip resurfacings in Canadian academic centres. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 118-21.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Fouilleron N, Wavreille G, Endjah N, et al. Running activity after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40: 889-94.CrossRefPubMed Fouilleron N, Wavreille G, Endjah N, et al. Running activity after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40: 889-94.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Girard J, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA, et al. Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88: 721-6.CrossRefPubMed Girard J, Lavigne M, Vendittoli PA, et al. Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip: a randomised study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88: 721-6.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Glyn-Jones S, Pandit H, Kwon YM, et al. Risk factors for inflammatory pseudotumour formation following hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91: 1566-74.CrossRefPubMed Glyn-Jones S, Pandit H, Kwon YM, et al. Risk factors for inflammatory pseudotumour formation following hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91: 1566-74.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Good V, Ries M, Barrack RL, et al. Reduced wear with oxidized zirconium femoral heads. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A(Suppl 4): 105-10.CrossRef Good V, Ries M, Barrack RL, et al. Reduced wear with oxidized zirconium femoral heads. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A(Suppl 4): 105-10.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Gross TP, Liu F. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with an uncemented femoral component. A seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90: 32-7.CrossRefPubMed Gross TP, Liu F. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with an uncemented femoral component. A seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90: 32-7.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Gross TP, Liu F. The first 100 fully porous-coated femoral components in hip resurfacing. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2011; 69: S30-5.PubMed Gross TP, Liu F. The first 100 fully porous-coated femoral components in hip resurfacing. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2011; 69: S30-5.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Itayem R, Arndt A, Nistor L, et al. Stability of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty at two years. A radiostereophotogrammetric analysis study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87: 158-62.CrossRefPubMed Itayem R, Arndt A, Nistor L, et al. Stability of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty at two years. A radiostereophotogrammetric analysis study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005; 87: 158-62.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Katrana P, Crawford JR, Vowler S, et al. Femoral neck resorption after hip resurfacing arthroplasty a comparison of cemented and uncemented prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88: S234.CrossRef Katrana P, Crawford JR, Vowler S, et al. Femoral neck resorption after hip resurfacing arthroplasty a comparison of cemented and uncemented prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88: S234.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Kishida Y, Sugano N, Nishii T, et al. Preservation of the bone mineral density of the femur after surface replacement of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86: 185-9.CrossRefPubMed Kishida Y, Sugano N, Nishii T, et al. Preservation of the bone mineral density of the femur after surface replacement of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86: 185-9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Lilikakis AK, Vowler SL, Villar RN. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral implant in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasty: minimum of two years follow-up. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005; 36: 215-22.CrossRefPubMed Lilikakis AK, Vowler SL, Villar RN. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral implant in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasty: minimum of two years follow-up. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005; 36: 215-22.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Matharu GS, Daniel J, Ziaee H, et al. Failure of a novel ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 2015; 30: 416-8.CrossRefPubMed Matharu GS, Daniel J, Ziaee H, et al. Failure of a novel ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 2015; 30: 416-8.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Mazzullo S, Paolini M, Verdi C. Numerical simulation of thermal bone necrosis during cementation of femoral prostheses. J Math Biol. 1991; 29: 475-94.CrossRefPubMed Mazzullo S, Paolini M, Verdi C. Numerical simulation of thermal bone necrosis during cementation of femoral prostheses. J Math Biol. 1991; 29: 475-94.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference McMinn DJ, Pradhan C, Ziaee H, et al. Is mid-head resection a durable conservative option in the presence of poor femoral bone quality and distorted anatomy? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469: 1589-97.CrossRefPubMed McMinn DJ, Pradhan C, Ziaee H, et al. Is mid-head resection a durable conservative option in the presence of poor femoral bone quality and distorted anatomy? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469: 1589-97.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Pritchett J. Highly cross-linked polyethylene for hip resurfacing: results at 10 years in patients under age 50. ISTA (International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty), Vienna, 2015, 11A-6. Pritchett J. Highly cross-linked polyethylene for hip resurfacing: results at 10 years in patients under age 50. ISTA (International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty), Vienna, 2015, 11A-6.
25.
go back to reference Rahman L, Muirhead-Allwood SK. The Birmingham mid-head resection arthroplasty—minimum two year clinical and radiological follow-up: an independent single surgeon series. Hip Int 2011; 21(3). doi: 10.5301/HIP.2011.8407 Rahman L, Muirhead-Allwood SK. The Birmingham mid-head resection arthroplasty—minimum two year clinical and radiological follow-up: an independent single surgeon series. Hip Int 2011; 21(3). doi: 10.​5301/​HIP.​2011.​8407
27.
go back to reference Seppänen M, Mäkelä K, Virolainen P, et al. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: short-term survivorship of 4,401 hips from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2012; 83: 207-13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Seppänen M, Mäkelä K, Virolainen P, et al. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: short-term survivorship of 4,401 hips from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2012; 83: 207-13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Spector BM, Ries MD, Bourne RB, et al. Wear performance of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene on oxidized zirconium total knee femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83: 80-6.CrossRefPubMed Spector BM, Ries MD, Bourne RB, et al. Wear performance of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene on oxidized zirconium total knee femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83: 80-6.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Spencer RF. Evolution in hip resurfacing design and contemporary experience with an uncemented device. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 84-8.CrossRefPubMed Spencer RF. Evolution in hip resurfacing design and contemporary experience with an uncemented device. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93: 84-8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Hip Resurfacing: International Perspectives
Review Article
Author
Julien Girard, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-02-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
HSS Journal ® / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 1556-3316
Electronic ISSN: 1556-3324
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-016-9511-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

HSS Journal ® 1/2017 Go to the issue

Global Tribology Summit

Global Tribology Summit Editorial