RESULTS OF HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY (HRA) IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEONECROSIS OF THE FEMORAL HEAD

Abstract

Although total hip arthroplasty (THA) is quite predictable and durable in older patients, young and active patients have higher rates of revision and these rates are especially increased when the etiology is osteonecrosis. Recent advancement of hip resurfacing technology, HRA has been revived again. Numerous advantages and promising results of HRA have been published. But patient selection and techniques etc still remain issues for HRA in general and especially for patients with osteonecrosis. In the case of HRA in patients with osteoarthritis, the bone quality is stronger and there is no head necrosis and surgical techniques are fundamentally different when compared to osteonecrosis. In osteonecrosis, there is a higher risk and greater concern of the neck fracture due to necrosis and osteoporosis, insecure fixations as well as a progression of necrosis in the subchondral bone. These factors should be considered when assessing hips with osteonecrosis. The ultimate assessment is the condition of the prepared femoral head. This makes resurfacing arthroplasty for osteonecrosis a challenging procedure.

This study was performed to assess the overall clinical and radiological results of the total resurfacing arthroplasty for the patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head(ONFH) after a minimum 5 year-follow-up.

444 hips of ONFH received resurfacing arthroplasty from Sep 1998 to Mar.2008. 88 hips which were followed up minimally 5 years were included in this study.

Among 88 hips(79 patients) of ONFH that have underwent hip resurfacing arthroplasties from Dec 1998 to Apr 2003, 85 hips(76 patients) were available for the complete study. The mean age at the time of operation was 37 (16–67) years old. The average follow-up period was 80 (60–112) months. The patients were clinically evaluated with the Harris hip score, hip or thigh pain, limb length discrepancy and range of motion. As a radiological evaluation, we observed the changes of implant position, patterns of bone remodeling in the neck and complications such as femoral neck fracture, loosening and osteolysis. Metal ion in the serum was also analysed.

The Harris hip score increased from 77.8 preoperatively to 98.4 at the final visit. Hip abduction/adduction and rotations significantly improved after the operation. Flexion contracture disappeared and further flexion also returned to almost normal. No patient complained of limb length discrepancy and pain on the hip or thigh at the last visit. Although they are not related to the clinical result, some cases showed various types of radiographic changes in the neck of the proximal femur. Neck narrowing was observed in 3 hips. There was no detectable wear or change of position of the acetabular cup and femoral stem.

Our experience with resurfacing arthroplasty in osteonecrosis of the femoral head indicates that the overall results are superior to conventional THA in the aspect of pain relief, the range of hip motion, earlier rehabilitation and earlier return to preoperative activity. This procedure of his resurfacing arthroplasty could be an alternative between joint preserving procedures and THA in the case of early-to-mid staged osteonecrosis of the femoral head especially in younger patients who need arthroplasty. Extent and location of necrosis, and bone quality are the most important factors in resurfacing arthroplasty in osteonecrosis. Precise preoperative planning and meticulous surgical technique is needed to perform resurfacing arthroplasty. But long-term studies are needed to determine the survivorship and to evaluate the metal toxicity after resurfacing arthroplasty.