Abstract
Background and aim
Since the market withdrawal of the ASR hip resurfacing in August 2010 because of a higher than expected revision rate as reported in the Australian Joint Replacement Registry (AOAJRR), metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has become a controversial procedure for hip replacement. Failures related to destructive adverse local tissue reactions to metal wear debris have further discredited MoMHRA. Longer term series from experienced resurfacing specialists however, demonstrated good outcomes with excellent 10-to-15-year survivorship in young and active men. These results have recently been confirmed for some MoMHRA designs in the AOAJRR. Besides, all hip replacement registries report significantly worse survivorship of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients under 50 compared to older ages. The aim of this study was to review MoMHRA survivorship from the national registries reporting on hip resurfacing and determine the risk factors for revision in the different registries.
Methods
The latest annual reports from the AOAJRR, the National Joint Registry of England and Wales (NJR), the Swedish Hip Registry (SHR), the Finnish Arthroplasty Registry, the New Zealand Joint Registry and the Arthroplasty Registry of the Emilia-Romagna Region in Italy (RIPO) were reviewed for 10-year survivorship of MoMHRA in general and specific designs in particular. Other registries did not have enough hip resurfacing data or long term data yet. The survivorship data were compared to conventional THA in comparable age groups and determinants for success/failure such as gender, age, diagnosis, implant design and size and surgical experience were reviewed.
Results
All registries showed a significant decline of the use of MoMHRA. The AOAJRR reported a cumulative revision rate of 9.5% (95%CI: 8.9–10.1%) at 10 years for all hip resurfacings. Female gender, developmental dysplasia and femoral head sizes <49mm were significant risk factors with revision rates twice as high for head sizes <49mm compared to >55mm. In males, cumulative revision rate for all MoMHRA was 6.6% at 10 years and 7.8% at 13years with no difference in the age groups. ASR had significantly higher revision rates (23.9% at 7 years) compared to other designs. The Adept and the Mitch had the lowest revision rates at 7 years (3.6%). Cumulative revision rates for 10,750 BHR (males and females pooled) were 5.0% at 7 years, 6.9% at 10years and 8.4% at 13 years. Cumulative revision rates of THA in patients <55 years was 6.0% at 10 years and 9.4% at 13 years. Similar survivorship results were found in the Finnish, Swedish, New Zealand and RIPO registry. In the SHR, 10-year survivorship of THA in patients <50 was only around 87%. In the NJR, cumulative revision rates for all MoMHRA pooled were much less favourable (13% at 10 years – 22% in patients<50) but the revision probability of ASR was 30.4% compared to 9.0% for BHR. Surgical experience was also identified as an important determinant of success/failure.
Discussion
Registries are now confirming good 10-year survivorship of certain MoMHRA designs with excellent results in males. Risk factors for revision are female gender, small head size, dysplasia and certain implant designs.
