Femoral neck fracture is a recognised complication of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing. But stress fracture is uncommon. Femoral neck stress fractures are one of the most difficult problems to diagnose. The pain associated with a femoral neck stress fracture often is localized poorly and may be referred to the thigh or back. We present a young fit gentleman who underwent Birmingham Hip resurfacing for Osteoarthritis Hip. He underwent Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Right side with satisfactory post-operative x-rays and progress. He presented for the Left side Birmingham Hip Resurfacing. X-rays revealed a stress fracture through the femoral neck. Patient was asymptomatic and refused any surgical intervention. Patient successfully underwent Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Left side. The Right stress fracture neck of femur healed in varus without any further complications. The patient is asymptomatic after 30 months of diagnosis. We conclude that expectant treatment has role in asymptomatic stress fracture following Birmingham Hip resurfacing

Purpose: To find the incidence of Periprosthitic fracture following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing over the age of 65 yrs – in Ashford & St. Peters Hospitals. Method: We have done an audit to study the total number of patients who had Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing, comparing them with the incidence of Femoral neck fracture in the age group of 65 yrs & above, from the period of March 2000 to January 2006 in Ashford & St. Peters Hospitals (NHS & Private). Between March 2000 and January 2006, 327 Birmingham hips were inserted by 8 surgeons. Fracture of the neck of the femur occurred in 5 patients, an incidence of 1.53%. Results:. 1 Intra op fracture & 4 post op fractures. Out of the total number of patients, 131 were above the age of 65years, with mean age of 68.80 years & a range of 65–77 years. No Femoral neck fractures were found in this age group. Conclusion: Incidence of Femoral neck fracture is NIL in the age group of 65 yrs & above compared to 1.53% over all

Introduction: Hip Resurfacing has always been an attractive concept for the treatment of hip arthritis in young patients. Excellent early and medium-term results have been reported with the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device in single and multi-surgeon all-diagnoses and OA series. In the present report we present the results of BHR in inflammatory arthritis. Methods: This is a single-surgeon consecutive series. There were 15 consecutive hips (12 patients) including 2 women (2 hips) with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) operated at a mean age of 41.7 years (range 29.5 to 54.3 years). Fortytwo hips (31 patients) with seronegative or rheumatoid (RA) arthritis treated with a BHR at a mean age of 40 (13 to 64) years and a follow-up of 2 to 9 (mean 5.9) years were also studied. One patient died 5 years later. Revision for any reason was the end-point and unrevised patients were assessed with Oxford hip scores and reviewed clinico-radiologically with AP and lateral radiographs. Results: In the RA group there was one failure from femoral neck fracture two months after operation giving a failure rate of 2.4%. There were no failures in this cohort at a follow-up of 1.8 to 8.8 (mean 4.9) years. As a combined group the failure rate of BHRs in inflammatory arthritis is 1.75% and the cumulative survivorship at 9 years is 98.2% (figure). Discussion: The good results of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing in inflammatory arthritis in this relatively young cohort of patients make this a viable treatment option for these patients. Selection of patients with a reason-able bone quality and adherence to precise operative technique are vital to the success of this procedure

When the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) metal-on-metal implant system was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2006, a multicenter, prospective, post-approval study (PAS) was required. This study uses data from the PAS to investigate metal level and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) trends over the first decade in vivo. Between October 2006 and March 2011, 290 primary BHR procedures were performed among 262 patients at 5 sites. Whole blood samples were sent to a single specialized laboratory to determine GFR, cobalt (Co) and chromium (Cr) levels. The population for this study consists of 117 unrevised unilateral patients with a mean age at surgery of 51.3±6.5 years who had pre-operative, 1-year, 4-year, 5-year and 10-year laboratory data. The mean follow-up for these patients that included 36 females was 10.1±0.2 years. Median metal levels at 1-year increased relative to pre-operative values for Co (by a factor of 9.7 from 0.13 to 1.26 ppb, p<0.001) and Cr (by a factor of 2.5 from 0. 60 to 1.50 ppb, p<0.001). Metal levels subsequently remained relatively constant over time with a median 10-year value of 1.12 ppb for Co and 1.29 ppb for Cr. Based on 585 blood samples from all 117 patients, there was no relationship between GFR and Co (. →. =−0.06, p=0.14) or Cr (. →. =0.05, p=0.27) levels. However, lower pre-operative GFR values were associated with larger increases in Co at 1-year relative to the pre-operative level (. →. =−0.26, p=0.005). There was no relationship between pre-operative GFR values and changes in Cr at 1 year (. →. =−0.13, p=0.15). Through the first decade in vivo, elevated whole blood metal levels for unilateral BHR patients do not appear to adversely affect GFR. However, patients with lower pre-operative GFR values tend to have larger increases in their Co level at 1-year

My experience with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing began in July 2000 and continues to this day for selected cases including OA, AVN, CDH and also following old fracture deformity and Femoral/Pelvic osteotomy. Early on, the criteria for patient selection expanded with increasing experience and positive acceptance by patients but then moderated as adverse reports including those from our National Joint Replacement Registry suggested a need for caution with Surface Replacement. Over 10 years, (July 2000 — July 2010), a personal series of 243 BHRs were followed (169 male — 74 female) with only one return to theatre in that time (4 days post op. to revise a poorly seated acetabular cup in a dysplastic socket). There were no femoral neck fractures in that 10 year period but 3 femoral cap/stem lucencies were known (2 female-1 male) with insignificant symptoms to require revision. The complete 10 year series of cases were then matched in the Australian National Joint Replacement Registry. No other revisions were identified by the Registry for all 243 cases. Soon after completing this encouraging outcome study however 3 revision procedures have been necessary (2 for sudden late head/neck failure including one of the three with known cap/stem lucencies and one for suspected pseudotumour/ALVAL). One healing stress fracture of the femoral neck and another further cap/stem loosening have also presented recently but with little in the way of symptoms at this stage. Surprisingly, there is little indication which case is likely to present with problems even in the presence of many cases done earlier where one would be cautious now to use a BHR but which have ongoing good outcomes. (e.g., AVN or the elderly osteoporotic patient). My journey therefore with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing over that first 10 years has been very positive and I believe it retains an important place for the younger patient with good bone quality. However it has become only recently apparent in my series of 243 cases that late onset unpredictable problems can arise which is likely to further narrow my selection criteria for this procedure. The likely outcome will be that it will have a more limited place in my joint replacement practice despite the very positive early experience

The purpose of this study is to show our experience with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing which we think it is a procedure that will play a big role in hip replacement surgery, especially for young people. Methods:. Operative Records from the Theatre Registrar Book, Implant register Book and the theatre computer records. Other similar studies from other Hospitals. Birmingham Hip Resurfacing – Ashford and St. Peter’s Hospitals Experience for the period March 2000 to January 2004. The total number of cases done for the period: 290. The number of patients: 277. Male: 160. Female: 130. Right Hip: 145. Left Hip: 120. Side not recorded: 25. Both sides done: 13. Primary cases: 286. Revisions: 4. The youngest male done aged: 25 years. The youngest female done aged: 33 years. The oldest male done aged: 75 years. The oldest female done aged: 72 years. Mean age: 56.5 years. Conclusion: Birmingham Metal on Metal Resurfacing started by Mr. Derek McMinn at about 13 years ago. Our results and results world-wide are encouraging. The failure rate of THR in young patients is very high, and the revision is difficult and requires a major reconstructive operation. Therefore BHR is a good alternative in our opinion

We present a consecutive case cohort of the first 100 Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)'s in 90 patients with a minimum follow up of 20 years. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon having commenced the study in 1998. The original cohort included 68 males with 75 hips (7 bilateral) and 22 females with 25 hips (3 bilateral). The mean age at index procedure was 52. Patients were recalled to review in clinic as per Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency guidelines with x-rays, metal ions and Harris Hip Scores recorded. After a minimum of 20 year follow-up review the known overall revision rate is 11%. 11 have died and 7 have been lost to review. In males the known revision rate is 4/75 (5%), 3 of which were due to early fractures and 1 revision for infection at 5 years. The known revision rate in females is 7/25 (28%) of which 6 were due to adverse reactions to metal debris; 3 at 7–8 yrs, 1 at 15 yrs, 2 at 18 years, and 1 at 2 months for avascular necrosis. The mean 20 year metal ions results were cobalt 36.6 nmol/l (range 7.4–232.1) and chromium 32.1 nmol/l (range 6–120.8). The mean Harris hip score was 88.5 (range 38.6–99.8). This case series with 20 years follow-up demonstrates excellent long term survival of the BHRs further to registry BHR data and similar to THR for same age recipients. Applying today's strict criteria for patient selection would likely improve survival rate further. BHR has not demonstrated the catastrophic revision rates associated with some metal-on-metal resurfacing and remains a safe option for those who meet the criteria

A concern of metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is long term exposure to Cobalt (Co) and Chromium (CR) wear debris from the bearing. This study compares whole blood metal ion levels from patients drawn at one-year following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) to levels taken at a minimum 10-year follow-up. A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent a BHR for osteoarthritis with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Whole blood metal ion levels were drawn at final follow-up in June 2019. These results were compared to values from patients with one-year metal ion levels. Of the 211 patients who received a BHR, 71 patients (54 males and 17 females) had long term metal ion levels assessed (mean follow-up 12.7 +/− 1.4 years). The mean Co and Cr levels for patients with unilateral BHRs (43 males and 13 females) were 3.12 ± 6.31 ug/L and 2.62 ± 2.69 ug/L, respectively, and 2.78 ± 1.02 ug/L and 1.83 ± 0.65 ug/L for patients with bilateral BHRs (11 males and 4 females). Thirty-five patients (27 male and 8 female) had metal-ion levels tested at one-year postoperatively. The mean changes in Co and Cr levels were 2.29 ug/l (p = 0.0919) and 0.57 (p = 0.1612), respectively, at one year compared to long-term. These changes were not statistically significant. This study reveals that whole blood metal ion levels do not change significantly when comparing one-year and ten-year Co and Cr levels. These ion levels appear to reach a steady state at one year. Our results also suggest that regular metal-ion testing as per current Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) guidelines may be impractical for asymptomatic patients. Metal-ion levels, in and of themselves, may in fact possess little utility in determining the risk of failure and should be paired with radiographic and clinical findings to determine the need for revision

We previously reported the five to ten-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) implant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survivorship, radiographic results, and clinical outcomes of the BHR at long-term follow-up. We retrospectively reviewed 250 patients from the original cohort of 324 BHRs performed from 2006 to 2013 who met contemporary BHR indications. Of these, 4 patients died and 4 withdrew. From the 242 patients, 224 patients (93%) were available for analysis. Modified Harris hip score (mHHS) and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores were collected and compared to a matched total hip arthroplasty (THA) cohort. Mean follow-up was 14 years. Survivorship free of aseptic revision was 97.4% and survivorship free of any revision was 96.0% at 15 years. Revisions included 3 periprosthetic joint infections, 2 for elevated metal ions and symptomatic pseudotumor, 2 for aseptic femoral loosening, and 1 for unexplained pain. The mean mHHS was 93 in BHR patients at final follow-up, similar to the THA cohort (p=0.44). The UCLA score was significantly higher for BHR patients (p=0.02), however there were equal proportions of patients who remained highly active (UCLA 9 or 10) in both groups, 60.5% and 52.2% (p=0.45) for BHR and THA respectively. Metal ion levels at long term follow-up were low (mean serum cobalt 1.8±1.5 ppb and mean serum chromium 2.2±2.0 ppb). BHR demonstrated excellent survivorship in males less than 60 years of age at time of surgery. Clinical outcomes and activity levels were similar to THA patients. Failures related to the metal-on-metal bearing were rare and metal levels were low at long-term follow-up. Level of evidence: III. Keywords: survivorship; hip arthroplasty; activity; metal-on-metal. Surface Replacement Arthroplasty demonstrates low revision rates and similar activity level compared to total hip arthroplasty at long-term follow-up

Introduction: The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device was introduced in 1997 as a conservative hip arthroplasty option for young patients with severe arthritis. Primary osteoarthritis is the most common etiology of hip arthritis in the West. Excellent early and medium-term results have been reported with the BHR. This is a 9–year review of the first 100 consecutive BHRs performed by one surgeon (DJWM) for primary OA. Methods: The first 100 BHRs (91 patients) performed for OA are now at a mean follow-up of 9.1 (range 8.9 to 9.3) years. Four patients (5 hips) died 5.2 to 6.9 years later due to unrelated causes. Patients with unrevised hips were reviewed clinico-radiologically and with questionnaire assessment. Results: With revision for any reason as the end-point there were four failures (two were post-operative AVN leading to femoral head collapse, 8 months and 7 years after their respective operations; and two were deep infections both 5 years after operation). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a 96% cumulative survival at 9 years (figure). There were no failures from osteolysis or aseptic loosening and no patient is awaiting a revision for any reason. Discussion: The performance of the BHR continues to be good at 9 years. Arthroplasty devices are known to manifest two phases of failure, one in the early years and another in the later years. Early failure with this device has been very low. The interim years are continuing to be promising and we are yet to find out when the late failures, if any, are likely to occur

Introduction: The results of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device in several series reveal that the predominant mode of failure is femoral neck fracture or femoral head collapse and that careful patient selection and precise operative technique are vital to the success of this procedure. In this report we consider the results of BHR in patients with severe arthritis secondary to femoral head AVN. Methods: This is a single-surgeon consecutive series of BHRs with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Fifty six patients with Ficat-Arlet grade III or IV femoral head AVN and treated with BHRs at a mean age of 44.2 years (range 19 to 67.7 years) were followed-up for 5 to 9.2 years (mean 6.8 years). No patient died and none was lost to follow-up. Revision for any reason was the end-point and unrevised patients were assessed with Oxford hip scores. They were also reviewed clinically and with AP and lateral radiographs. Results: There were four failures in this cohort giving a failure rate of 7% and a cumulative survivorship of 92.9% at 9 years (figure). In one further patient the femoral component has tilted into varus from further collapse of the femoral head. He is asymptomatic but knows that he will need a revision if he develops symptoms. No other patient shows clinical or radiological adverse signs. Discussion: Several studies have shown that the results of arthroplasty are generally worse in AVN as compared to those in osteoarthritis. Reviewing the above results it appears to us that the relatively poorer cumulative survival observed in patients with a diagnosis of AVN (92.9%) compared to those with other diagnoses make AVN a relative contraindication to this procedure

We report the survival at ten years of 173 consecutive Birmingham Hip Resurfacing’s implanted between August 1997 and August 1998 at a single institution. Failure was defined as revision of either the acetabular or femoral component for any reason during the study period. The survival at the end of ten years was 96.5% (95%c. i. 89.1 – 99.5%) The mean age of the patients at implantation was 50 years (range 15 – 75). There were 124 (72%) male cases and 49 (28%) female cases. 123 (71%) cases had the diagnosis of osteoarthritis, 9 osteonecrosis, 5 rheumatoid and 3 DDH. The posterior approach was used in 154 (89%) cases and anterolateral in 19 (11%). Cases were performed by 5 different surgeons. There were 5 revisions, 9 unrelated deaths and 18 were lost to follow-up beyond 5 years. Two revisions occurred for infection (6 months and 2 years). A revision at 3.5 years for acetabular loosening and two further at 6.4 and 7.9 years due to avascular necrosis of the femoral head and collapse were performed. No other revisions are impending. The median pre-operative oxford hip score was 61% (IQR 48–73) and the median 10 year score was 7% (IQR 0–31) for 110 completed forms. Further analysis of the total resurfacing database at this institution of 2775 cases was performed. Cox-proportional hazard analysis identified that component size and pre-operative diagnosis were significantly associated with failure. Although females may initially appear to have a greater risk of revision this is related to differences in the size and pre-operative diagnosis between the genders. This study confirms that hip resurfacing using a metal-on-metal bearing of known provenance can provide a solution in the medium term for the younger more active adult who requires surgical intervention for hip disease

We present the results of our initial experience with the use of the Birmingham metal-on-metal Hip Resurfacing. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing(BHR) consists of a high carbon chrome cobalt uncemented hydroxyapatite cupand a cemented femoral component. For patients with severe dysplasia adysplasia cup with screws was used. We utilise this kind of prosthesis for the younger patients (< 65 year). Excellent clinical results are encountered; none of the early problems aswith the old Wagner resurfacing (metal-on-poly) are seen. Our early results are similar to the encouraging results of the series of D.McMinn/R.Treacy. From September 1998 through April 2001, 185 BHR arthroplasties were performed. The mean age was 49.7 year (16–75). More male patients were operated with this method than female patients (64%–36%). The aetiology was osteoarthritis (81%), necrosis (9%), dysplasia (CDH) (6.6%). Results: The last 115 patients were reviewed with a follow up from 1 month to 2.5year. Only two patients were lost for follow-up because of death. There was no pain in 92.3% of the cases. The total Harris Hip Score had a mean of97.91, a median score of 100 (71–100). Merle d’Aubigné total Score was 17.36 (12–18). There was a strenuous activity in 70.2% of the patients. The mean length of stay in hospital was six days (range: 2–26). Complications were: One fractured neck of femur, one ischial nerve palsy and one guide pin was left in the femur. All patients were followed on regular basis and the X-rays were studied for angle of preoperative neck of femur, postoperative angle of the femoral component, angle of cup placement and the parallelism of both components. Conclusion: Performing only alternate bearings in patients under the age of 75, the metal-on-metal Birmingham Hip Resurfacing looks a good alternative in young active patients and the results are promising

Introduction: The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) is a metal on metal prosthesis with no published independent clinical studies. It is increasingly used as an alternative to stemmed prostheses in younger patients. This study presents the 2 year migration results of the BHR femoral component using Roentgen Stereophoto-grammteric Analysis (RSA). Methods: 26 hips in 24 subjects underwent a BHR, through the postero-lateral approach using CMW3G cement. RSA marker balls were placed in the cortical bone of the femur intra-operatively. The femoral component migration was measured at intervals of 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively using the Oxford RSA system. The implants were un-modified, geometric algorithms were used to identify the femoral component. Results: The BHR femoral component showed no significant displacement from its immediate post-operative position. All components of migration showed no significant displacement in any direction, at 1 or 2 years. Conclusion: The BHR femoral component does not migrate significantly within the first two post-operative years. Its’ migration compares favourably to other designs of femoral component. The BHR is therefore likely to remain stable in the future, as the majority of implant migration occurs within the first two years

Introduction. The results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device in several series reveal that the predominant mode of failure is femoral neck fracture or femoral head collapse and that careful patient selection and precise operative technique are vital to the success of this procedure. In this report we consider the results of BHR in patients with severe arthritis secondary to femoral head AVN. Methods. This was a single-surgeon consecutive series of BHRs with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Fifty-nine patients with Ficat-Arlet grade III or IV femoral head AVN (66 hips) and treated with BHRs at a mean age of 43.9 years (range 19 to 67.7 years) were followed up for 5.4 to 9.6 years (mean 7.1 years). No patient died and none was lost to follow-up. Revision for any reason was the end-point and unrevised patients were assessed with Oxford hip scores. They were also reviewed clinically and with AP and lateral radiographs. Results. There were five failures in this cohort, giving a failure rate of 7.6% and a cumulative survivorship of 86% at 9.6 years. In one further patient the femoral component has tilted into varus from further collapse of the femoral head. He is asymptomatic but knows that he will need a revision if he develops symptoms. No other patient shows clinical or radiological adverse signs. Discussion. Several studies have shown that the results of arthroplasty are generally worse in AVN as compared to those in osteoarthritis. Reviewing the above results it appears to us that the relatively poorer cumulative survival observed in patients with a diagnosis of AVN (86%) compared to those with other diagnoses make AVN a relative contraindication to the hip resurfacing procedure

Introduction: Although resurfacing hip replacements are widely used there are few little independent outcome data to support this. The aim of this study was to report the 5 year clinical outcome and 7 year survival of an independent series. Method: 610 Birmingham hip resurfacings were implanted in 532 patients with an average age of 51.8 years (range 16.5–81.6 years) and were followed for between 2 to 8 years; 120 of this series had minimum five year follow-up. Two patients were lost. There were 23 revisions, giving an overall survival of 95% (95% CI 85–99%) at seven years. Fractured neck of femur (n=13) was the most common reason for revision, followed by aseptic loosening (n=4). There were also 3 patients who had failures that were possibly related to metal debris. At a minimum of 5 year follow-up 93% had excellent or good outcome according to the Harris Hip Score. The mean Oxford Hip Score was 16.1 points (SD 7.7) and the mean UCLA activity score was 6.6 points (SD 1.9). There were no patients with definite evidence of radiographic loosening or greater than 10% of neck narrowing. Discussion: The results demonstrate that with the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing, implanted using the extended posterior approach, the five year survival is similar or better to the reported survival rates for cemented and hybrid THR’s in young patients. Conclusions: Considering these patients are young and active these results are good and support the use of resurfacing. However, further study is needed to address the early failures; particularly those related to fracture and metal debris

Aim: The purpose of this study was to analyze the in-vivo wear rates of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR, Midland Medical Technologies Ltd., Birmingham, U.K.) explants and to contrast the results to the wear rates of conventional 28 mm metal-on-metal bearings (Metasul, Zimmer GmbH, Winterthur, Switzerland). Methods: The wear rates, measured by a coordinate measuring machine (CMM5, SIP, Geneva, Switzerland), of 6 femoral components and two complete pairings of the BHR retrieved from 8 hips were contrasted to 43 28 mm heads from second generation metal-on-metal bearings (Metasul, Sulzer Orthopaedics Ltd., Winterthur, Switzerland). Results: After 13 months (7 to 24) the BHR femoral heads showed a median volumetric wear rate of 2.9 mm. 3. (interquartile range: 0.8 to 7.1), slightly, but not significantly higher than the investigated 43 28mm Metasul heads (0.8 mm. 3. /year, p = 0.067, 14 months [7 to 24] in-situ). One BHR case with a cup abduction angle of 70° showed a significant higher wear rate of 17.8 mm. 3. All BHR cases showed only small amounts of metallic particle histological and correspondingly, a mild histiocytic tissue response without foreign body granuloma formation. Discussion: During the first two years after surgery the investigated BHR components showed wear rates substantially lower than conventional polyethylene bearings, comparable to Metasul bearings, implanted with very successful clinical results. But whether the wear rates will drop down after the so called running-in period comparable to conventional metal-on-metal bearings and provide young and active patients with a biologically acceptable particle volume over a long time period, still remains to be seen

Introduction. Since the introduction of 3rd generation Metal-on-Metal-Hip-Resurfacing-Arthroplasty (MoMHRA), thousands of such prostheses have been implanted worldwide in younger patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. However, no independent centre has reported their medium-to-long term outcome. The aim of this study is to report the ten year survival and outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), the most commonly used MoMHRA worldwide. Methods. Since 1999, 648 BHRs were implanted in 555 patients, the majority of which were male (326). The mean age at surgery was 52.1years (range: 17–82), with primary OA as most common indication (85%). Mean follow up was 7.1years (range: 1–11). The Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and UCLA questionnaires were sent to all patients. Implant survival was established, with revision as the end point. Sub-analysis was performed by gender, femoral component size (small: <45mm, standard: 46–52, large: >53mm) and age at surgery (young:<50yrs, old:>50yrs). Results. Preliminary results show that survival and clinical outcome were better in men than women (p=0.013) and in patients with large and standard components compared to small (p=0.005). In women the survival and clinical outcome were worse in the young than the old (p=0.049). In men there was no difference in survival or clinical outcome between the young and old (p=0.106). In young men the 10-year survival was 95%, the mean OHS was 45 and the mean UCLA score was 8.1. Conclusion. The results of resurfacing are good in men. They perform particularly well in the young and highly active men who tend to have problems with conventional hip replacements

Introduction: Interest in hip resurfacing has recently been renewed by the introduction of metal-on-metal designs; it is being increasingly used for young patients, with over 30,000 implanted worldwide. The 5 year clinical results appear promising, but there are no long term data available. Radiostereometry (RSA) measures of implant migration have been able to predict implant failure; specifically large and continuous migration predicts aseptic loosening. We present the results of a five year RSA study examining the migration of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR). Methods: Twenty-four subjects with primary OA were implanted with the BHR device and with bone markers for RSA. RSA measurements were taken at 3, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months. The migration of the head and the tip of femoral component were measured in 3D. Results: Preliminary analysis showed that the total 3D migration of the head and tip over five years was 0.32mm and 0.23mm respectively. Discussion: A distal migration of more than 0.4mm over 2 years increases the likelihood of failure in conventional stems. The total migration of the BHR was approximately 0.3mm over a five year period, significantly less than cemented THR devices. The device is stable and this is promising for long-term survival

Aim: We present the outcome of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty performed by a single surgeon after at least five years follow up. Patients and Methods: One hundred hips in 84 patients were studied with a mean follow-up of 6.4 years (5–8.3 years), performed by a single surgeon. Three patients died of unrelated causes and 2 patients were lost to follow-up, hence the study group comprised of 79 patients with 95 hips. Birmingham resurfacing femoral and acetabular components were used in all patients. The clinical outcome was measured using Harris, Charnley, Oxford hip scores and quality of life using SF-36. Radiographs were systematically analysed for implant position, fixation, and loosening. Results: The mean age was 54 years (20–74years) and BMI of 28 (19–35). Primary osteoarthritis was seen in 69 hips. Six patients (6.1%) underwent revision of the femoral component (3 for peri-prosthetic fractures of the neck of femur, 2 for deep infection and 1 for collapse due to AVN). None of the patients had evidence of loosening around the acetabular component and femoral components in 28 patients. Type 1 pedestal sign was seen in 61 hips and Type 2 in 2 hips. The clinical scores were respectively, Harris 85 (25–100), Oxford 21.5 (12–52), mean Charnley score 4.8 for pain, 5.3 for movement and 4.3 for mobility; the mean SF-36 score were 44 (12–58) for the physical and 51.4 (19–71) for the mental component. With an end point of definite or probable aseptic loosening, the probability of survival at 5 years was 100% and 97.3% (95% CI = 2.9) for acetabular and femoral components respectively. Overall survival at 5years with removal or repeat revision of either component for any reason as the end point was 91% (95% CI: 82 to 97%). Conclusion: The results of this study support the continued use of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty in young active individuals. As loosening can occur as a late phenomenon, a longer follow up is needed to determine longevity, durability of this prosthesis