OUTCOME OF FAILED HIP RESURFACING REVISED TO THR DEPENDS ON REVISION INDICATION

Abstract

Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has gained popularity due to its perceived advantages of bone conservation and relative ease of revision to a conventional THR if it fails. Known MoMHRA-associated complications include femoral neck fracture, avascular necrosis/collapse of the femoral head/neck, aseptic loosening and soft tissue responses such as ALVAL and pseudotumours. This study’s aim was to assess the functional outcome of failed MoMHRA revised to THR and compare it with a matched cohort of primary THRs.

Method: We have revised 53 MoMHRA cases to THR; the reasons for revision were femoral neck fracture (Fracture Group, n=21), soft tissue reaction (Pseudotumour Group, n=16) and other causes (Other Group, n=16: loosening, AVN and infection). Average followup was 2.9 years. These MoMHRA revisions were compared with 103 matched controls from a primary THR cohort; matched for age, gender and length of followup. We compared, using the MannWhitney U test, operative time (OT, measured in minutes), and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) between the revised MoMHRA groups and their individual controls. We also compared, using the Kruskal Wallis test, UCLA Activity Score in the revised MoMHRA groups.

Results: There were no differences between the Fracture Group (mean OT 99.6, SD: 30.4; mean OHS 19.8, SD:9.2) and its controls (mean OT 95.9, SD: 31.8; mean OHS 17.3, SD: 7.5) nor between the Other Group (mean OT 129.4, SD: 36.7; mean OHS 22.2, SD: 9.4) and its controls (mean OT 104.4, SD: 39.2; mean OHS 20.3, SD: 10.1) in terms of OT and OHS. The Pseudotumour Group had significantly longer OT (mean 161.6, SD: 24.5, p< 0.001) and worse outcome (mean OHS 39.1, SD: 9.3, p< 0.001) than its controls (mean OT 113.1, SD: 51.7; mean OHS 20.0, SD: 9.2). In the Fracture Group, there were 3 infections requiring revisions. For the Pseudotumour Group, there were 3 recurrent dislocations, 1 femoral artery stenosis and 3 femoral nerve palsies. In the Other Group, there were 2 periprosthetic fractures. There was significant difference (p< 0.001) in UCLA scores between the MoMHRA groups. The Pseudotumour Group had the lowest mean UCLA score of 3.8 (SD: 1.89). The Fracture Group (mean: 7.0, S.D. 2.0) and the Other Group (mean: 6.7, S.D. 2.1) had similar UCLA scores.

Discussion: The results demonstrate that outcome after revision of MoMHRA is dependent upon the indication for revision. Patients revised for soft tissue reactions had significantly worse outcome. Patients with soft tissue reactions are more likely to experience complications and require further surgical intervention. The pseudotumour associated revisions were associated with a significantly prolonged OT. The overall complication rate for the study groups was quite high, with 11 (21%) revised MoMHRA cases experiencing a complication. The Pseudotumour Group had a higher complication rate (37%).