Abstract
In 1997 the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing was introduced to address the needs of young active patients. Alternative designs were introduced to try and improve wear performance. The aim of this study was a comparative cohort study of two types of metal-on-metal bearing to determine the mechanism of failure at 15 years.
The study reviewed 91 Brimingham Hip Resurfacings (BHR) (Smith and Nephew) and 715 DUROM hip resurfacing (Zimmer) procedures in prior to 2009. Failure was defined as revision of either component for any reason. Kaplan-Meyer survivorship analysis performed. Routine follow-up with serum metal ion levels and radiographs.
Mean follow-up was 17.9 years (range 15.2 – 25.1). The mean age at operation was 51.6 years (SD 8.6, range 20.7 to 70.2), including 299 women (37.1%). The Birmingham resurfacing demonstrated 92.3% survivorship at 15 years (SE 2.8, 95% CI 3.9 – 7.8) and 90.0% at latest follow-up (SE 3.5, 95% CI 4.9 to 9.4). By comparison, the DUROM survivorship at 15 years was 89.1% at 15 years (SE 1.2, 95% CI 2.0 to 2.5) and 87.4% (SE 1.3, 95% CI 2.5 to 2.3) at latest follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference in survivorship between groups (p= 0.32). Survival in male patients was 92.7% compared to 80.0% in females. The reported failures occurred from Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris (32 patients), periprosthetic femoral neck fracture (6) and aseptic loosening (41), PJI (12) and undiagnosed pain (6). The mean cobalt and chromium levels at last follow-up were 33.4 nmol/L and 36.5 nmol/L respectively.
This study demonstrates two differently designed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing provided a durable alternative to total hip replacement, particularly in younger male patients with osteoarthritis. Differences in design did determine the reason for revision with acetabular fixation being one of the principal failure mechanisms for the DUROM compared to elevated ion levels.
