Purpose. Elevated blood metal ions are associated with the early failure of the Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to analyse our prospective database of Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty patients, to independently review the outliers with elevated blood metal ions and to determine whether a screening program would be of value at our institution. Method. In 2004 a ten year prospective longitudinal study was set up to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacings in young, active adults with degenerative hip disease. Six hundred and four patients have enrolled in this multi-surgeon prospective study with strict inclusion criteria for Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty. All have received the same implant design. All have completed validated functional outcome questionnaires at baseline, three and six months, then annually. A sub-cohort of 196 patients underwent whole blood chromium and cobalt analysis at the same time periods. Metal on metal bearings have a running in period of a minimum of six months before a steady state wear pattern is attained. We chose five parts per billion for Cobalt or Chromium as our threshold value. This value corresponds to the workplace exposure limit in the United Kingdom to Cobalt in whole blood. Therefore patients with ion levels greater than five parts per billion after six months were recalled for independent review, including further metal ion analysis. Results. Twenty two patients were recalled. Twenty one patients (32 Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasties) were reviewed. At latest review 11 patients (15 Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasties; eight females) had levels greater than five parts per billion. Mean follow up was 59.8 months (47–78). Mean age at surgery was 48.7 years (37–55). Median femoral component size was 50 millimetres (42–54). Mean acetabular anteversion was 18.3 degrees (−5.2 43.0). Mean acetabular inclination was 46.1 degrees (33.1–57.1). Mean cobalt and chromium levels were 8.82 parts per billion (3.49 18.42) and 9.15 parts per billion (3.79 24.33). Patients with ion levels greater than five parts per billion were associated with inferior functional scores (p= 0.018), inferior hip flexion (p=0.01) and mal-positioned acetabular components (p=0.023). All symptomatic patients were female. Conclusion. It is reassuring that the majority do not have elevated metal ions (185/196; 94.4%). That said, blood metal ion screening of Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasties aids in the early detection of problematic cases. Comprehensive clinical review should follow as patient safety is paramount. The early detection of problematic cases is advantageous to the surgeon and patient. Revision surgery for an established pseudotumour has been found to be technically challenging, often with a poor outcome

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

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

Purpose. This study was performed to evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes of Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty for treatment of haemophilic hip arthropathy. Material & Method. Between 2002 and 2013, 17 cases of hip resurfacing arthroplasties were performed in 16 haemophilic patients (13 cases of haemophilia A, 2 cases of haemophilia B, 2 cases of von Willebrand disease). The average age of the patients was 32.5(range: 18∼52) years. The average follow up period from the operation was 6.3 (range: 2∼13) years. In this study, the subjects that completed follow-up were composed of 5 cases composed of patients who were treated with Conserve plus. ®. hip resurfacing system, 5 cases composed of patients who were treated with Durom. ®. hip resurfacing system, 4 cases who were treated with ASR. ®. hip resurfacing system, and 3 cases who were treated with Birmingham. ®. hip resurfacing system. The Modified Harris hip score, the range of motion of the hip joint, perioperative coagulation factor requirements and complications associated with bleeding were evaluated as part of the clinical assessment. For the radiographic assessment, fixation of component, presence of femoral neck fracture, osteolysis, loosening and other complications were evaluated. Results. The modified Harris hip score improved from 65.4(47–80) points before surgery to 97.8(90–100) points at the last follow-up. The average further flexion improved from 103° (70–135) to 110°(80–130) after surgery. The average abduction improved from 22.4° (0–45) to 41.3° (20–50) after surgery. All the patients showed a significant reduction in pain. The mean requirement of factor VIII reduced from 2470 units per month before surgery to 1125 units per month at the time of the last follow-up. However, in the case of high-titer inhibitor to factor VIII, haemophilia B, von Willebrand disease, the average monthly factor requirement was not changed due to bleeding episode of other joints. There was two cases of re-bleeding. There were no femoral neck fracture, no osteolysis, and no implant loosening in last follow up. Conclusion. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty for haemophilic hip arthropathy in patients with mild deformity or relatively preserved range of the hip joint motion can bring reliable pain relief, functional improvement, and reduction of factor requirement for over two years follow-up study. However, bleeding-associated complications are a cause for concern, especially for patients with antibodies against coagulation factors

Introduction. Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (HRA) has been performed in the United States for over 10 years and is an alternative to standard Total Hip Arthropastly (THA). It is appealing to younger patients with end stage osteoarthritis who seek to maintain active lifestyles. Benefits of HRA versus THR include a larger femoral ball size, potential to return to impact activities, decreased dislocation rates, and restoration of normal hip biomechanics. Patients ≤50 years old are a particularly challenging patient group to treat with THA because of their young age and high activity level, and as such, are well-suited for HRA. However, there are limited reports in the literature about clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes for this patient cohort. We present results of a clinical investigation at our institution for this patient cohort with minimum 5-year follow up, including long term survivorship and outcome scores. Methods. HRA, using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), was performed for 538 procedures between 2006–2009 by a single surgeon at a United States teaching hospital. After Institutional Review Board approval, medical and radiographic study records were retrospectively reviewed. Harris Hip Scores (HHS) were routinely collected. Patients who had not returned for follow-up examination were contacted by telephone for information pertaining to their status and implant, and a modified HHS was also administered. A Kaplan Meier survival curve was constructed to evaluate time to revision. Statistical analysis was performed (SAS version 9.3; SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Results. Of the 538 patients who underwent HRA from 2006–2009, 238 were aged ≤50 years (44%). Five-year follow up data was obtained from 209 of these patients (88%), using medical record documentation, and telephone survey as needed. The mean follow-up for all patients was 6 years (range 5–8 years). A total of 3% (8/238) were revised. Reasons included: (i) femoral loosening in 4, (ii) Iliopsoas impingement in 1, (iii) metallosis/adverse tissue reaction in 1, (iv) femoral neck fracture following motor vehicle accident in 1, and (v) unknown reasons in 1. Of the 238 patients, 55 (23%) were female, 2 (2/55; 3.6%) of whom have since undergone revision surgery for either metallosis/adverse tissue reaction, or unknown reasons. Of the 53 women who retained their BHR at 5-year follow up, the average HHS was 96.5. Of the 238 patients, 183 (77%) were male patients, 6 (6/183; 3.2%) of whom have since undergone revision surgery for femoral component loosening, iliopsoas impingement, or femoral neck fracture sustained in a motor vehicle accident. At 5-year follow-up, 177 male patients retained their implant and had an average Harris Hip Score of 98.8. The overall implant survival was 96.6% at approximately 5 years. Conclusion. In our cohort of patients aged ≤50 treated with BHR [Fig. 1], our results demonstrated 5-year survivorship of 96.6%, with average HHS of 98.8 in males and 96.5 in females. This study demonstrates HRA is a successful alternative to traditional THA in a challenging cohort of younger, active patients

Introduction. Patients presenting with osteoarthritis as late sequelae following pediatric hip trauma have few options aside from standard Total Hip Replacement (THR). For younger more active patients, Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (HRA) can be offered as an alternative. HRA has been performed in the United States over the past decade and allows increased bone preservation, decreased hip dislocation rates versus THR, and potential to return to full activities. Patients presenting with end-stage hip arthritis as following prior pediatric trauma or disease often have altered hip morphology making HRA more complicated. Often Legg-Calve-Perthes (LCP) patients present with short, wide femoral necks, and femoral head distortion including coxa magna or coxa plana. There often can be acetabular dysplasia in conjunction with the proximal femoral abnormalities. Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE) patients have an alteration of the femoral neck and head alignment, which can make reshaping the femoral head difficult. In particular, the femoral head is rotated medially and posteriorly, reducing the anterior and lateral offset. We present a cohort of 20 patients, with history of a childhood hip disorder (SCFE or LCP), who underwent HRA to treat end-stage arthritis. Fifty percent had prior pediatric surgical intervention at an average age of 11. Method. After Institutional Review Board approval, data was reviewed retrospectively on patients with pediatric hip diseases of SCFE and LCP who underwent HRA using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) by a single orthopaedic surgeon at a teaching institution. Harris Hip Scores (HHS), plain radiographs and blood metal ion levels were reviewed at routine intervals (12 months and annually thereafter). Those who had not returned for recent follow-up were contacted via telephone survey for a modified HHS. Results. Twenty patients had mean follow up of 2.8 years (range 1–7 years). Twelve had LCP and 8 SCFE. Median implant duration was 2.4 years. One-year metal ion testing revealed median chromium level of 2.3 ppb and median Cobalt level of 1.5 ppb. At one-year follow up, plain radiographs demonstrated all patient implants to be well-fixed, without radiolucent lines or osteolysis. Two patients at three and five-year follow-up exhibited heterotopic ossification. Mean HHS for LCP at 6 weeks post-operative was 88, and 98 at one year. Mean HHS for SCFE at 6 weeks post-operative was 77.5, and 98.6 at one year. LLD was significantly improved with an average pre-operative LLD of 12.6 mm and post op of 2.6 mm (p-value <0.001). At most recent follow-up, all retained their implants with overall average HHS of 98. Conclusion. At minimum of one-year following HRA, an increase in functional outcomes is found in patients who underwent HRA for osteoarthritis associated with LCP and SCFE with a mean HHS of 98. No increase was found in complications including femoral neck fracture or implant loosening despite technical challenges of the procedure related to proximal femoral morphologic abnormalities, or presence of acetabular dysplasia [Fig 1]

Hip Resurfacing in its current metal on metal hybrid fixation form has been performed in large numbers in Australia since 1999. Outcomes from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry are shown. While there is a wide range of outcomes these can be shown to depend on patient factors and implant factors. Use of one of the successful implants (for example the Birmingham Hip) in a young male patient with osteoarthritis by a suitably trained surgeon can lead to good results. In the AOA NJRR the 10 year cumulative percent revision rate for the Birmingham Hip in male patients under the age of 60 at the time of surgery is 3.3%

Introduction. Hip Resurfacing has been shown to be a valuable treatment for younger osteoarthritis patients related to functional outcomes. On the other hand, there is a higher risk for potential neck fractures and there is serious concern over metal-ion release and related health risks associated with the current metal-on-metal designs. Neck-preserving, short-stem implants may be a good alternative for younger patients. The current study investigated patient-reported outcomes from resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a neck preserving, short-stem implant (Corin MiniHip®). Methods. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome scores (HOOS) from a young group of patients (n= 52, age 48.9±6.1 years) who underwent hip resurfacing surgery and a cohort of patients who underwent MiniHip® THA surgery (n=73, age 48.2±6.6) were compared. MANCOVA analysis was conducted including follow-up period as covariate. To compare complexity of the surgical intervention, the average durations for both types of surgery were compared using non-parametric testing (Mann-Whitney's U). Results. As expected, both surgical interventions were associated with significant improvements in HOOS scores (p<0.0001, h2=.69); however, there were no group effects or interactions related to any of the HOOS subscales. Surgery duration was significantly longer for Resurfacing (104.4min±17.8) than for MiniHip® surgery (62.5min±14.8), U=85.0, p<0.0001, h2=.56. Conclusions. The current results indicate that the neck-preserving, short-stem approach via MiniHip Arthroplasty is equal to Resurfacing in terms of younger patients’ outcomes, while requiring shorter surgery duration. Additionally, there are serious concerns regarding the metal-on-metal designs of Resurfacing implants, which provides more support for the value of the presented short-stem alternative. Future research will aim at a longer-term (>5 years) evaluation of outcomes

Introduction. Hip resurfacing arthoplasty (HRA) is an alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), which has increased in the last years, especially in young patients. A suitable positioning of the resurfacing head is important, mainly because it is strongly related with the neck fracture. The goal of this work was to evaluate the influence of the resurfacing head positioning in the load distribution along the femurs’ structures. Materials and methods. Using 3D scan technology, the exterior geometry of a composite femur, used to create the FE models, was obtained. Three resurfacing models were used in three different positions in the frontal plane. A model with a positive offset of +5mm (Resurfacing #1), in neutral position (Resurfacing #2), and with a negative offset of −5mm (Resurfacing #3) was developed. A Birmingham® Hip Resurfacing prosthesis was chosen according to the femurs’ head. It was positioned in the femur and acetabulum by an experimented surgeon. The metal on metal contact pair was implemented. Models were aligned with 7° and 9°, considering the position of the anatomical femurs in sagittal and frontal planes. Models were constrained on the wing of the ilium and ischial tuberosity, allowing only vertical and rotational movements on the iliac side. Femurs were constrained on its distal side, allowing only rotational movements. Results. The most important strains in four different aspects, anterior, posterior, medial and anterior were analyzed. The highest differences occurred on the medial alignment of femurs. Comparing models Resurfacing #1 and Resurfacing #2, the highest displacement increase (11%) comparatively at the neutral position was observed. Besides, comparing models Resurfacing #2 and Resurfacing #3, displacement decrease of 13% (resurfacing #3) in the same region was observed. Thus, one can conclude that: a positive offset increases the strains on the femurs neck; a negative offset decreases the strains on the same region. According to these results, one can state that the risk of neck fracture in resurfacing implants slightly increases as the resurfacing head is positioned with a positive offset. Beyond that region, differences are not relevant

This study aims to investigate femoral blood flow during Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing (MMHR) by monitoring oxygen concentration during the operative procedure. Patients undergoing MMHR using the posterior approach were evaluated. Following division of fascia lata, a calibrated gas-measuring electrode was inserted into the femoral neck, aiming for the supero-lateral quadrant of the head. Baseline oxygen concentration levels were detected after electrode insertion 2-3cm below the femoral head surface and all intra-operative measures were referenced against these. Oxygen levels were continuously monitored throughout the operation. Data from ten patients are presented. Oxygen concentration dropped most noticeably during the surgical approach and was reduced by 62% (Std.dev +/-26%) following dislocation and capsulectomy. Insertion of implants resulted in a further oxygenation decrease by 18% (Std.dev +/-28%). The last obtained measure before wound closure detected 22% (Std.dev +/-31%) of initial baseline oxygen levels. Variation between subjects was observed and three patients demonstrated a limited recovery of oxygen levels during implant insertion and hip relocation. Intra-operative measurement of oxygen concentration in blood perfusing the femoral head is feasible. Results in ten patients undergoing MMHR showed a dramatic effect on the oxygenation in the femoral head during surgical approach and implant fixation. This may increase the risk of avascular necrosis and subsequent femoral neck fracture. Future experiments will determine if less invasive procedures or specific positioning of the limb can protect the blood supply to femoral neck and head

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

The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) has been used in the younger more active patient for the treatment of advanced osteoarthritis. Long-term follow-up of the BHR is limited. The Australian national joint replacement registry shows that failure rates vary greatly, depending on implant types. 77 consecutive BHR procedures with a minimum ten year follow-up are reported. There were 70 patients (44 males and 26 females) with an average operation age of 57.4 years (SD ±12.6). All patients were evaluated, including the “learning curve” patients. The mean follow-up period was 11.42 years (SD ±0.50). The arthroplasties were performed between April 1999 and December 2000 by one surgeon, with a standardised patient selection set of criteria. Data and outcome measurements were collected prospectively and analysed retrospectively. We evaluated Harris Hip Scores, Short Form-36 (SF-36v2) Scores, Tegner Activity Score Scores and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Scores (WOMAC) comparatively at preoperative, six month and yearly intervals. In 8 patients (10 procedures) the implant was in situ at the time of death. Revision was carried out in 6 hips (7.8%) at a mean time period of 2.5 years (0–10) post-operatively. Failure was due to femoral neck fracture in four patients, acetabular loosening in one and avascular necrosis of the femoral head, leading to loosening, in one patient. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed survivorship of 92.2% to 10 years. The mean Harris Hip scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 59.7 preoperatively to 80.1 at ten years. The mean SF-36v2 physical scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 35.09 preoperatively to 47.83 at ten years. WOMAC scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 54.61 preoperatively to 85.89 at ten years. The BHR prosthesis, in this series, has been shown to be effective, reliable, and durable in this group of highly active, relatively young patients. Problems with metallic debris, sensitivity reactions, and osteolysis have not been seen. However, we believe that with better selection criteria, improved understanding of component positioning and surgical techniques, results can be improved

Introduction. Metal on metal hip arthroplasty continues to be controversial. Emerging evidence suggests that there are multiple modes of failure, and that the results of revision surgery are influenced by host and implant factors. Methods. This study compares a single surgeon series of hip resurfacings (Birmingham Hip Resurfacing {BHR}) and large diameter metal on metal total hip replacements (LDMOMTHR). Primary outcome measures included survival rates, failure secondary to histologically identified Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris (ARMD), and patient reported outcome measures (Oxford Hip Score {OHS}) following revision. Between 1999 and 2005, 458 BHR and 175 LDMOMTHR were performed. At latest review 43 BHR's (9.4%) and 28 LDMOMTHR's (14%) have been revised. Results. Failure secondary to ARMD was significantly greater in LDMOMTHR compared to BHR failures (89% and 16% respectively). Histology demonstrated a higher Aseptic Lymphocytic Vascular and Associated Lesions (ALVAL) score in the LDMOMTHR failures than the BHR failures (8.6 LDMOMTHR, 6.3 BHR). Patient reported outcomes were better following revision for failed BHR compared to LDMOMTHR. There was no difference between the revision cohorts for cup inclination, metal ion levels and gender. Failure of the BHR has predominantly been due to those causes unique to resurfacing such as avascular necrosis and fracture. In our series, aggressive ALVAL was unusual and clinical outcome following revision was superior compared to LDMOMTHR failures. The likely mechanisms that are responsible for the differences in outcome and the clinical implications will be discussed

Introduction. Patients who undergo hip resurfacing, total hip arthroplasty (THA), and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are frequently assessed post-operatively using objective scoring indices. A small yet significant percentage of these patients report specific unfulfilled functions following surgery, indicating unmet expectations. The purpose of this study was to examine the types of functional deficits reported for each class of surgery, how frequently these limitations occur, and the demographic of patients who experience/report these limitations. Methods. Four groups of subjects were enrolled in this study: (i) 111 hip resurfacing patients at an average of 14 months after resurfacing, (ii) 170 patients at an average of 16 months post-primary THA, (iii) 61 patients at an average of 12 months post-primary TKA, and (iv) 64 control subjects with no history of hip or knee surgery or pathology. Each participant completed a self-administered Hip Function Questionnaire, Knee Function Questionnaire, or Hip Resurfacing Questionnaire which assessed each subject's overall satisfaction and expectations following surgery. The questionnaires included numerical scores of post-operative function as well as an open-ended question which inquired “Is there anything your knee/hip keeps you from doing?”. Results. A population of patients self-reported specific functional deficits after surgery, including 29 (26.1%) resurfacing, 5 (2.9%) THA, and 32 (52.5%) TKA. The unfulfilled functions varied based on the procedure, with most resurfacing and THA patients reporting trouble with running/jogging, while TKA patients experienced difficulty kneeling. Patients who reported functional deficits also tended to endorse lower overall satisfaction levels after surgery; the mean satisfaction score for hip resurfacing in those who reported deficits was 4.03 (scale of 1–5) versus 4.50 (p=0.09) in those who denied a functional deficit, 2.20 versus 4.47 (p=0.003) in THA patients, and 4.10 versus 4.36 (p=0.35) in TKA patients. The demographic of patients who reported limitations varied based on the type of surgery. After hip resurfacing 19.0% (4/21) of female patients reported specific deficits compared to 27.3% (23/84) of male patients; 6.1% (5/81) of female THA patients reported compared to 0% (0/84) of males, and 48.6% (18/37) of female TKA patients reported compared to 58.3% (14/24) of males. The mean age of those who reported deficits versus those who did not report deficits was not significant. Conclusions. Despite advances in arthroplasty and resurfacing techniques, a significant portion of patients are experiencing functional limitations following hip resurfacing, TKA, and THA procedures. The frequency and types of limitations reported vary based on the surgery, with TKA patients reporting deficits with the highest frequency and THA patients reporting with the lowest frequency. The gender of the patient appears to play a role in whether specific functional deficits are reported or not, with female patients more likely to report after THA and male patients slightly more likely to report after either hip resurfacing or TKA. Summary. A small portion of hip resurfacing, THA, and TKA patients report specific unfulfilled functions following surgery. The frequency and types of deficits, and the demographic of patients reporting them, varies based on the procedure

Introduction. Patients who undergo hip resurfacing, total hip arthroplasty (THA), and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are frequently assessed post-operatively using objective scoring indices. A small yet significant percentage of these patients report pain and discomfort related to specific physical activities following surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine the types of activities which prove difficult for patients for each class of surgery, how important these activities are to the individual patients, and the demographic of patients who experience/report these limitations. Methods. Four groups of subjects were enrolled in this study: (i) 111 hip resurfacing patients at an average of 14 months after resurfacing, (ii) 170 patients at an average of 16 months post-primary THA, (iii) 61 patients at an average of 12 months post-primary TKA, and (iv) 64 control subjects with no history of hip or knee surgery or pathology. Each participant completed a self-administered Hip Function Questionnaire, Knee Function Questionnaire, or Hip Resurfacing Questionnaire which assessed each subject's overall satisfaction and expectations following surgery. The questionnaires included a section with 58 physical activities and asked the patients to rate the activities based on frequency of participation, importance of the activity, and how much their knee or hip bothered them when performing the activity. Results. The activities were scored for difficulty/bother on a scale of 1–5 with 5 being the most difficult, and scores of 4 or 5 were classified as “very difficult.” A population of patients rated activities as very difficult after surgery, including 33 (29.7%) resurfacing, 17 (10.0%) THA, and 32 (50.8%) TKA. The difficult activities varied based on the procedure, with many resurfacing patients reporting trouble with kneeling, squatting, and running; THA patients reporting trouble with squatting, sexual activity, and stretching; and TKA patients reporting trouble with gardening, kneeling, and squatting. The importance of the activities were also scored on a 1–5 scale with 5 being very important to the patient. The average importance scores for the difficult activities were 3.88 for resurfacing patients, 3.35 for THA patients, and 3.58 for THA patients. The demographic of patients who reported activities as difficult varied based on the type of surgery. After hip resurfacing 19.0% (4/21) of female patients reported activities as being difficult compared to 34.5% (29/84) of male patients; 13.6% (11/81) of female THA patients reported compared to 6.0% (5/84) of males, and 48.6% (18/37) of female TKA patients reported compared to 54.2% (13/24) of males. Conclusions. A significant portion of patients experience great difficulty with certain physical activities following hip resurfacing, TKA, and THA procedures. The frequency and types of difficult activities reported vary based on the surgery, with TKA patients reporting with the highest frequency and THA patients reporting with the lowest frequency. The gender of the patient appears to play a role in whether certain activities are difficult or not, with female patients more likely to report after THA and TKA, and male patients more likely to report after hip resurfacing

We retrospectively reviewed the mid term outcome of 88 MoM THA in 84 patients and 21Hip Resurfacing using Recap Magnum bearing surface performed during 2006 – 2009. There were 41 males and 47 females in the THA group and 17 males and 4 females in the Hip Resurfacing group. All procedures were performed through a posterior approach. The average head size for the THR group was 46mm and the cup size was 52mm and the average head size for the resurfacing was 50mm and cup size was 56mm respectively. Median age for the THA group was 60 yrs. (28–73) and for the Resurfacing it was 51.5 yrs. (32–62). Average follow up was 76 months for the THA group and 78 months for the Resurfacing group. Average serum cobalt for the THA and the Resurfacing groups were 53.2nmol/l (119) and 30.85 and the Chromium levels were 82.44nmol/l(134.5) and 67.49 respectively. Eight MRI scans showed abnormal fluid collections suspicious of ARMD in the THA group and 2 showed fluid collection in the Resurfacing group. There were five revisions in the THA group with the tissue diagnosis of ALVAL. In all except one case a well fixed uncemented stem (Taperloc) was retained. In our series Recap Magnum on a Taperloc stem showed 94% survival at five years and therefore we continue to review the cases annually with serum cobalt chromium levels and MRI scans

Background

Complications of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing, leading to implant failure, include femoral notching, neck fracture, and avascular necrosis. Revision arthroplasty options include femoral-only revision with a head, however mis-matching radial clearance could accelerate metal ion release. Alternatively, revision of a well-fixed acetabular component could lead to further bone loss, complicating revision surgery. We have developed a ceramic hip resurfacing system with a titanium-ceramic taper junction; taking advantage of the low frictional torque and wear rates that ceramic affords. Taking a revision scenario into account, the ceramic head has a deep female taper for the resurfacing stem, but also a superficial tapered rim. Should revision to this resurfacing be required, any femoral stem with a 12/14 taper can be implanted, onto which a dual taper adaptor is attached. The outer diameter of the taper adaptor then becomes the male taper for the superficial taper of the ceramic head; ultimately allowing retention of the acetabular component. In an in-vitro model, we have compared the fretting corrosion of this taper adaptor to existing revision taper options: a titanium-cobalt chrome (Ti-CoCr) taper junction, and a titanium-titanium sleeve-ceramic (Ti-Ti-Cer) taper junction.

Introduction. Secondary osteoarthritis in a dysplastic hip is a surgical challenge. Severe leg length discrepancies and torsional deformities add to the problem of inadequate bony support available for the socket. Furthermore, many of these patients are young and wish to remain active, thereby jeopardising the long-term survival of any arthroplasty device. For such severely dysplastic hips, the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device provides the option of a dysplasia component, a hydroxyapatite-coated porous uncemented socket with two lugs to engage neutralisation screws for supplementary fixation into the solid bone of the ilium more medially. The gap between the superolateral surface of the socket component and the false acetabulum is filled with impacted bone graft. Methods and results. One hundred and thirteen consecutive dysplasia BHRs performed by the senior author (DJWM) for the treatment of severely arthritic hips with Crowe grade II and III dysplasia between 1997 and 2000 have been reviewed at a minimum five year follow-up. There were 106 patients (59M and 47F). Eighty of the 113 hips were old CDH or DDH, 29 were destructive primary or secondary arthritis with wandering acetabulae and four were old fracture dislocations of the hip. Mean age at operation was 47.5 years (range 21 to 68 years – thirty-six men and forty-four women were below the age of 55 years). There were two failures (1.8%) out of the 113 hips at a mean follow-up of 6.5 years (range 5 to 8.3 years). One hip failed with a femoral neck fracture nine days after the operation and another failed due to deep infection at 3.3 years. Conclusion. The dysplasia resurfacing device offers a good conservative arthroplasty option for these severely deficient hips

BACKGROUND. We originally performed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing using a Townley designed Vitallium Total Articular Replacement Arthroplasty (TARA) curved stemmed prosthesis. Neither the acetabular or femoral components were cemented or had porous coating. The bearing surfaces were consistently polar bearing. The surgical objectives were to preserve bone stock, maintain normal anatomy and mechanics of the hip joint and to approximate the normal stress transmission to the supporting femoral bone. The functional objectives were better sports participation, less thigh pain and limp, less perception of a leg length difference and a greater perception of a normal hip. Metal-on-metal was selected to conserve acetabular bone and avoid polyethylene associated osteolysis. Relatively few cases were performed until the Conserve Plus and later the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing systems became available. METHODS. We examined the results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patient with at least 10 years of follow-up and an age less than 50 at the time of surgery. We did not have access to the Birmingham Prosthesis until 2006. We performed 101 TARA procedures and 397 Conserve Plus procedures for 357 patients. For the combined series the mean age was 43 and 62% of patients were male. 34 patients had a conventional total hip replacement on the contralateral side. We used both the anterolateral and posterior approaches. All acetabular components were placed without cement and all the Conserve Plus Femoral Components were cemented. RESULTS. There were no implant related failures with the TARA prosthesis. The average Harris Hip Score was 93. There were 2 revisions for femoral neck fracture at years 8 and 14 and one revision for infection. There was one dislocation but no instance of implant loosening. There were 29 (7%) revisions with the Conserve Plus Prosthesis. 14 revisions were for adverse reactions to metal wear debris and 10 of these patients had femoral components of size 46 mm or smaller. There were 5 revisions for acetabular loosening and 3 for femoral loosening. There were 7 revisions for femoral neck fracture and infection. The limb lengths were measured to be within 1 cm of equal in 98% of patients. 95% of patients had a UCLA activity score above 6 and 96% of patients rated their outcome excellent or good. 32 of 34 patients preferred their hip resurfacing to total hip replacement. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 93%. Narrowing of the femoral neck was seen in 9% of patients but acetabular osteolysis was not seen. Signs of impingement of the femoral neck against the acetabular prosthesis were seen in 14% of patients. CONCLUSIONS. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has been performed for more than 40 years using predicate prostheses such as the Townley TARA. The results of metal-on-metal resurfacing are favorable even in young and very active individuals. There were no instances of medical illness related to metal-on-metal implants with up to 41 years of follow-up. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has favorable outcomes at 10 years. There is an increased chance of an adverse reaction to metal wear debris with femoral component sizes 46 mm or smaller

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a bone conserving alternative to total hip arthroplasty. We present the early 1 and 2-year clinical and radiographical follow-up of a novel ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) HRA in a multi-centric Australian cohort.

Patient undergoing HRA between September 2018 and April 2021 were prospectively included. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) in the form of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), HOOS Jr, WOMAC, Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and UCLA Activity Score were collected preoperatively and at 1- and 2-years post-operation. Serial radiographs were assessed for migration, component alignment, evidence of osteolysis/loosening and heterotopic ossification formation.

209 patients were identified of which 106 reached 2-year follow-up. Of these, 187 completed PROMS at 1 year and 90 at 2 years. There was significant improvement in HOOS (p< 0.001) and OHS (p< 0.001) between the pre-operative, 1-year and 2-years outcomes. Patients also reported improved pain (p<0.001), function (p<0.001) and reduced stiffness (p<0.001) as measured by the WOMAC score. Patients had improved activity scores on the UCLA Active Score (p<0.001) with 53% reporting return to impact activity at 2 years. FJS at 1 and 2-years were not significantly different (p=0.38). There was no migration, osteolysis or loosening of any of the implants. The mean acetabular cup inclination angle was 41.3° and the femoral component shaft angle was 137°. No fractures were reported over the 2-year follow-up with only 1 patient reporting a sciatic nerve palsy.

There was early return to impact activities in more than half our patients at 2 years with no early clinical or radiological complications related to the implant. Longer term follow-up with increased patient numbers are required to restore surgeon confidence in HRA and expand the use of this novel product.

In conclusion, CoC resurfacing at 2-years post-operation demonstrate promising results with satisfactory outcomes in all recorded PROMS.