Aims. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty has been used as a surgical treatment of coxarthrosis since 1997. We present 20-year results of 234 consecutive BHRs performed in our unit. Methods. Between 1999 and 2001, there were 217 patients: 142 males (65.4%), mean age 52 years (18 to 68) who had 234 implants (17 bilateral). They had patient-reported outcome measures collected, imaging (radiograph and ultrasound), and serum metal ion assessment. Survivorship analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Revision for any cause was considered as an endpoint for the analysis. Results. Mean follow-up was 20.9 years (19.3 to 22.4). Registry data revealed that 19 hips (8.1%) had been revised and 26 patients (12%) had died from causes unrelated to the BHR. Among the remaining 189 hips, 61% were available for clinical follow-up at 20 years (n = 115) and 70% of patients had biochemical follow-up (n = 132). The cumulative implant survival rate at 20 years for male patients was 96.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 93.5 to 99.6), and for female patients 87% (95% CI 79.7 to 94.9). The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.029). The mean Oxford Hip Score, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Forgotten Joint Score were 45 (29 to 48), 89 (43 to 100), and 84 (19 to 100), respectively. The mean scores for each of the five domains of the EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire were 1.2, 1.0, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.1, and mean overall score 82.6 (50 to 100). Ultrasound showed no pseudotumour. Mean cobalt and chromium levels were 32.1 nmol/l (1 to 374) and 45.5 nmol/l (9 to 408), respectively. Conclusion. This study shows that BHRs provide excellent survivorship and functional outcomes in young male patients. At 20 years, soft-tissue imaging and serum metal ion studies suggest that a metal-on-metal resurfacing implant can be well tolerated in a group of young patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(9):946–952

Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has been widely performed in the United Kingdom for over a decade. However, the literature reports conflicting views of the benefits: excellent medium- to long-term results with some brands in specific subgroups, but high failure rates and local soft-tissue reactions in others. The National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) has collected data on all hip resurfacings performed since 2003. This retrospective cohort study recorded survival time to revision from a resurfacing procedure, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis who underwent resurfacing between 2003 and 2010 were included in the analyses. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which the risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates. A total of 27 971 hip resurfacings were performed during the study period, of which 1003 (3.59%) underwent revision surgery. In the final adjusted model, we found that women were at greater risk of revision than men (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.30, p = 0.007), but the risk of revision was independent of age. Of the implant-specific predictors, five brands had a significantly greater risk of revision than the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) (ASR: HR = 2.82, p < 0.001, Conserve: HR = 2.03, p < 0.001, Cormet: HR = 1.43, p = 0.001, Durom: HR = 1.67, p < 0.001, Recap: HR = 1.58, p = 0.007). Smaller femoral head components were also significantly more likely to require revision (≤ 44 mm: HR = 2.14, p < 0.001, 45 to 47 mm: HR = 1.48, p = 0.001) than medium or large heads, as were operations performed by low-volume surgeons (HR = 1.36, p <  0.001). Once these influences had been removed, in 4873 male patients < 60 years old undergoing resurfacing with a BHR, the five-year estimated risk of revision was 1.59%. In summary, after adjustment for a range of covariates we found that there were significant differences in the rate of failure between brands and component sizes. Younger male patients had good five-year implant survival when the BHR was used

Recent events have highlighted the importance of implant design for survival and wear-related complications following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. The mid-term survival of the most widely used implant, the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), has been described by its designers. The aim of this study was to report the ten-year survival and patient-reported functional outcome of the BHR from an independent centre. In this cohort of 554 patients (646 BHRs) with a mean age of 51.9 years (16.5 to 81.5) followed for a mean of eight years (1 to 12), the survival and patient-reported functional outcome depended on gender and the size of the implant. In female hips (n = 267) the ten-year survival was 74% (95% confidence interval (CI) 83 to 91), the ten-year revision rate for pseudotumour was 7%, the mean Oxford hip score (OHS) was 43 (. sd. 8) and the mean UCLA activity score was 6.4 (. sd. 2). In male hips (n = 379) the ten-year survival was 95% (95% CI 92.0 to 97.4), the ten-year revision rate for pseudotumour was 1.7%, the mean OHS was 45 (. sd. 6) and the mean UCLA score was 7.6 (. sd. 2). In the most demanding subgroup, comprising male patients aged < 50 years treated for primary osteoarthritis, the survival was 99% (95% CI 97 to 100). This study supports the ongoing use of resurfacing in young active men, who are a subgroup of patients who tend to have problems with conventional THR. In contrast, the results in women have been poor and we do not recommend metal-on-metal resurfacing in women. Continuous follow-up is recommended because of the increasing incidence of pseudotumour with the passage of time

We previously reported the five to ten-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) implant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survivorship, radiographic results, and clinical outcomes of the BHR at long-term follow-up. We retrospectively reviewed 250 patients from the original cohort of 324 BHRs performed from 2006 to 2013 who met contemporary BHR indications. Of these, 4 patients died and 4 withdrew. From the 242 patients, 224 patients (93%) were available for analysis. Modified Harris hip score (mHHS) and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores were collected and compared to a matched total hip arthroplasty (THA) cohort. Mean follow-up was 14 years. Survivorship free of aseptic revision was 97.4% and survivorship free of any revision was 96.0% at 15 years. Revisions included 3 periprosthetic joint infections, 2 for elevated metal ions and symptomatic pseudotumor, 2 for aseptic femoral loosening, and 1 for unexplained pain. The mean mHHS was 93 in BHR patients at final follow-up, similar to the THA cohort (p=0.44). The UCLA score was significantly higher for BHR patients (p=0.02), however there were equal proportions of patients who remained highly active (UCLA 9 or 10) in both groups, 60.5% and 52.2% (p=0.45) for BHR and THA respectively. Metal ion levels at long term follow-up were low (mean serum cobalt 1.8±1.5 ppb and mean serum chromium 2.2±2.0 ppb). BHR demonstrated excellent survivorship in males less than 60 years of age at time of surgery. Clinical outcomes and activity levels were similar to THA patients. Failures related to the metal-on-metal bearing were rare and metal levels were low at long-term follow-up. Level of evidence: III. Keywords: survivorship; hip arthroplasty; activity; metal-on-metal. Surface Replacement Arthroplasty demonstrates low revision rates and similar activity level compared to total hip arthroplasty at long-term follow-up

Aims. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) was introduced in 1997 to address the needs of young active patients using a historically proven large-diameter metal-on-metal (MoM) bearing. A single designer surgeon’s consecutive series of 130 patients (144 hips) was previously reported at five and ten years, reporting three and ten failures, respectively. The aim of this study was to extend the follow-up of this original cohort at 25 years. Methods. The study extends the reporting on the first consecutive 144 resurfacing procedures in 130 patients for all indications. All operations were undertaken between August 1997 and May 1998. The mean age at operation was 52.1 years (SD 9.93; 17 to 76), and included 37 female patients (28.5%). Failure was defined as revision of either component for any reason. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. Routine follow-up with serum metal ion levels, radiographs, and Oxford Hip Scores (OHSs) was undertaken. Results. Overall implant survival was 83.50% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.90) at 25 years, and the number at risk was 79. Survival in male patients at 25 years was 89.5% (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96) compared to 66.9% for female patients (95% CI 0.51 to 0.83). Ten additional failures occurred in the period of ten to 25 years. These involved an adverse reaction to metal debris in four patients, a periprosthetic femoral neck fracture affecting five patients, and aseptic loosening in one patient. The median chromium levels were 49.50 nmol/l (interquartile range (IQR) 34 to 70), and the median cobalt serum levels were 42 nmol/l (IQR 24.50 to 71.25). The median OHS at last follow-up was 35 (IQR 10 to 48). During the 25-year study period, 29 patients died. Patient survival at 25 years was 75.10% (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83). Conclusion. This study demonstrates that MoM hip resurfacing using the BHR provides a durable alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), particularly in younger male patients with osteoarthritis wishing to maintain a high level of function. These results compare favourably to the best results for THAs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):540–547

Aims. The aim of this study was to report the implant survival and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a consecutive series of patients aged less than 50 years at the time of arthroplasty using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing system (BHR), with a minimum follow-up of ten years. Patients and Methods. A total of 226 patients with osteoarthritis of the hip, who underwent BHR and presented to a single surgeon, were included in the study. Survival of the implant was confirmed by cross-checking with the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Kaplan–Meier survival curves with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were constructed. Pre- and postoperative PROMs were compared with t-tests, and postoperative scores were compared using anchor analysis with age and gender matched normative data. Results. At median follow-up of 12 years (interquartile range (IQR) 10 to 13), six BHRs were revised, with a cumulative rate of survival of 96.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.2 to 99.4) at 15 years, and with a significantly lower (p = 0.019) cumulative rate of revision than the national average for the same device at ten years. Most revisions (n = 4) were undertaken early, less than three years postoperatively, and occurred in women. Patient-reported general health (Veteran’s Rand-36), disease state (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), function (modified Harris Hip Score) and level of activity (Tegner activity score) maintained significant (p < 0.01 for each) improvements beyond ten years postoperatively and were equal to, or exceeded, age- and gender-matched normative data in more than 80% of the patients. Conclusion. Longer term PROMs after BHR, from a single surgeon, for patients aged less than 50 years remain under-reported. We found that the outcome after a BHR, at a minimum of ten years postoperatively, remained satisfactory, particularly for self-reported hip function

When the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) metal-on-metal implant system was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2006, a multicenter, prospective, post-approval study (PAS) was required. This study uses data from the PAS to investigate metal level and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) trends over the first decade in vivo. Between October 2006 and March 2011, 290 primary BHR procedures were performed among 262 patients at 5 sites. Whole blood samples were sent to a single specialized laboratory to determine GFR, cobalt (Co) and chromium (Cr) levels. The population for this study consists of 117 unrevised unilateral patients with a mean age at surgery of 51.3±6.5 years who had pre-operative, 1-year, 4-year, 5-year and 10-year laboratory data. The mean follow-up for these patients that included 36 females was 10.1±0.2 years. Median metal levels at 1-year increased relative to pre-operative values for Co (by a factor of 9.7 from 0.13 to 1.26 ppb, p<0.001) and Cr (by a factor of 2.5 from 0. 60 to 1.50 ppb, p<0.001). Metal levels subsequently remained relatively constant over time with a median 10-year value of 1.12 ppb for Co and 1.29 ppb for Cr. Based on 585 blood samples from all 117 patients, there was no relationship between GFR and Co (. →. =−0.06, p=0.14) or Cr (. →. =0.05, p=0.27) levels. However, lower pre-operative GFR values were associated with larger increases in Co at 1-year relative to the pre-operative level (. →. =−0.26, p=0.005). There was no relationship between pre-operative GFR values and changes in Cr at 1 year (. →. =−0.13, p=0.15). Through the first decade in vivo, elevated whole blood metal levels for unilateral BHR patients do not appear to adversely affect GFR. However, patients with lower pre-operative GFR values tend to have larger increases in their Co level at 1-year

This study compared the demographic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes after total hip replacement (THR) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) carried out by a single surgeon. Patients completed a questionnaire that included the WOMAC, SF-36 scores and comorbid medical conditions. Data were collected before operation and one year after. The outcome scores were adjusted for age, gender, comorbid conditions and, at one year, for the pre-operative scores. There were 214 patients with a THR and 132 with a BHR. Patients with a BHR were significantly younger (49 vs 67 years, p < 0.0001), more likely to be male (68% vs 42% of THR, p < 0.0001) and had fewer comorbid conditions (1.3 vs 2.0, p < 0.0001). Before operation there was no difference in WOMAC and SF-36 scores, except for function, in which patients awaiting THR were worse than those awaiting a BHR. At one year patients with a BHR reported significantly better WOMAC pain scores (p = 0.04) and in all SF-36 domains (p < 0.05). Patients undergoing BHR report a significantly greater improvement in general health compared with those with a THR

We present a consecutive case cohort of the first 100 Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)'s in 90 patients with a minimum follow up of 20 years. All procedures were performed by a single surgeon having commenced the study in 1998. The original cohort included 68 males with 75 hips (7 bilateral) and 22 females with 25 hips (3 bilateral). The mean age at index procedure was 52. Patients were recalled to review in clinic as per Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency guidelines with x-rays, metal ions and Harris Hip Scores recorded. After a minimum of 20 year follow-up review the known overall revision rate is 11%. 11 have died and 7 have been lost to review. In males the known revision rate is 4/75 (5%), 3 of which were due to early fractures and 1 revision for infection at 5 years. The known revision rate in females is 7/25 (28%) of which 6 were due to adverse reactions to metal debris; 3 at 7–8 yrs, 1 at 15 yrs, 2 at 18 years, and 1 at 2 months for avascular necrosis. The mean 20 year metal ions results were cobalt 36.6 nmol/l (range 7.4–232.1) and chromium 32.1 nmol/l (range 6–120.8). The mean Harris hip score was 88.5 (range 38.6–99.8). This case series with 20 years follow-up demonstrates excellent long term survival of the BHRs further to registry BHR data and similar to THR for same age recipients. Applying today's strict criteria for patient selection would likely improve survival rate further. BHR has not demonstrated the catastrophic revision rates associated with some metal-on-metal resurfacing and remains a safe option for those who meet the criteria

The Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) hip resurfacing arthroplasty has a failure rate of 12.0% at five years, compared with 4.3% for the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR). We analysed 66 ASR and 64 BHR explanted metal-on-metal hip replacements with the aim of understanding their mechanisms of failure. We measured the linear wear rates of the acetabular and femoral components and analysed the clinical cause of failure, pre-revision blood metal ion levels and orientation of the acetabular component. There was no significant difference in metal ion levels (chromium, p = 0.82; cobalt, p = 0.40) or head wear rate (p = 0.14) between the two groups. The ASR had a significantly increased rate of wear of the acetabular component (p = 0.03) and a significantly increased occurrence of edge loading (p < 0.005), which can be attributed to differences in design between the ASR and BHR. The effects of differences in design on the in vivo wear rates are discussed: these may provide an explanation as to why the ASR is more sensitive to suboptimal positioning than the BHR

There have been no large comparative studies of the blood levels of metal ions after implantation of commercially available hip resurfacing devices which have taken into account the effects of femoral size and inclination and anteversion of the acetabular component. We present the results in 90 patients with unilateral articular surface replacement (ASR) hip resurfacings (mean time to blood sampling 26 months) and 70 patients with unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) implants (mean time 47 months). The whole blood and serum chromium (Cr) and cobalt (Co) concentrations were inversely related to the size of the femoral component in both groups (p < 0.05). Cr and Co were more strongly influenced by the position of the acetabular component in the case of the ASR, with an increase in metal ions observed at inclinations > 45° and anteversion angles of < 10° and > 20°. These levels were only increased in the BHR group when the acetabular component was implanted with an inclination > 55°. A significant relationship was identified between the anteversion of the BHR acetabular component and the levels of Cr and Co (p < 0.05 for Co), with an increase observed at anteversion angles < 10° and > 20°. The median whole blood and serum Cr concentrations of the male ASR patients were significantly lower than those of the BHR men (p < 0.001). This indicates that reduced diametral clearance may equate to a reduction in metal ion concentrations in larger joints with satisfactory orientation of the acetabular component

The 22 year survivorship of metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (RSA) is reported to be 94.3% with expert surgeons, in males with head sizes greater than 48mm. The 2023 National Joint Registry (NJR) report estimates survivorship of all RSA at 19 years to be 85%. This estimate includes all designs, head sizes and females. Our aim was to estimate the survivorship of RSA currently available for implantation (males only, head size >48mm, MatOrtho Adept or Smith and Nephew Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)) in those under 55 years, performed by all surgeons, compared to conventional THR. We performed a retrospective analysis of the NJR. We included all males under 55 years who had undergone BHR or Adept RSA with head size greater than 48mm. Propensity score matching was used to produce two comparable groups of patients for RSA or conventional THR. We matched in a 3:1 ratio (THR:RSA) using sex, ASA, BMI group, age at primary procedure, surgeon volume, diagnosis and surgeon grade as covariates. The primary analysis was survivorship at 18 years. Time-to-revision was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox's proportional hazard models were used to investigate between group differences. 4839 RSA were available for analysis. After matching the RSA and THR groups were well balanced in terms of covariates. Survivorship at 18 years was 93.7% (95% CI 89.9,96.2) in the RSA group and 93.9% (90.5,96.0) in the THR group. Despite these similar estimates the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.40 (95% CI 1.18, 1.67 p<0.001) in favour of THR. Survivorship of the currently available RSA in males under 55 was 93.7% at 18 years, however THR survivorship was superior to RSA. These results, generalisable to UK practice, should be set against perceived benefits in functional status offered in RSA when counselling patients

Surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) has been proposed as a viable option for the treatment of osteoarthritis in young, active patients. Positive results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in select patient groups have been described in international series and registry data. We report 5–10 year U.S. follow-up for the BHR at our high volume institution. 314 patients (361 hips) between 2006–2011 underwent BHR at our institution and agreed to participate in research. Demographic features, modified Harris Hip Score, UCLA Activity Score, and satisfaction were recorded for patients with minimum 5-year follow-up (90%). Radiographs were evaluated for implant position and “at risk” signs. Complications, reoperations, and revisions were investigated. Mean modified Harris Hip and UCLA scores significantly improved postoperatively to scores of 89.96 and 7.90 (p < 0.001), respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimated survival for all-cause revision was 96.7% [95% CI 94.7 – 98.7%] at 5 years and 91.5% [95% CI 85.3 – 97.6%] at 10 years. Estimated survival for aseptic revision in males less than 60 years old with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis was 99.5% [95% CI 98.7 – 100%] at 5 years and 98.8% [95% CI 97.0 – 100%] at 10 years. 14 patients required revision, including 5 revisions for adverse local tissue reaction. Our study demonstrated excellent survivorship and clinical outcomes at 5–10 year follow up for the BHR. These results mirror other series and registry data published outside of the United States. Continued long-term follow-up and additional studies are necessary to validate the long-term safety and outcomes of the BHR, especially in young active arthroplasty patients

Introduction. Many worldwide regulatory authorities recommend regular surveillance of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients given high failure rates. However concerns have been raised about whether such regular surveillance, which includes asymptomatic patients, is evidence-based and cost-effective. We determined: (1) the cost of implementing the 2015 MHRA surveillance in “at-risk” Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) patients, and (2) how many asymptomatic hips with adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) would have been missed if patients were not recalled. Methods. All BHR patients subject to the 2015 MHRA recall (all females, and males with head sizes 46mm or below, regardless of symptoms) at one specialist centre were invited for review (707 hips). All patients were investigated (Oxford Hip Score, radiographs, blood metal ions, and targeted cross-sectional imaging) and managed accordingly. Surveillance costs were calculated using finance department data, as was the number needed to treat (NNT) to avoid missing one case of asymptomatic ARMD. Results. The overall institutional surveillance cost to investigate all patients once was £105,922 (range £148 to £258 per patient). The most expensive aspects of surveillance were radiographs (£39,598), advanced nurse practitioner assistance (£23,618), cross-sectional imaging (£14,828), and blood metal ions (£14,825). 31 hips had imaging evidence of ARMD (12 revised, with 19 under surveillance). Seven hips were asymptomatic, however all revisions were symptomatic. The NNT to avoid missing one case of asymptomatic ARMD (on imaging and/or requiring revision) was 101 patients, equating to a screening cost of £18,041 to avoid one case of asymptomatic ARMD. Conclusions. Implementing MHRA surveillance for “at-risk” BHR patients was extremely costly, both financially and logistically. As the risk of asymptomatic ARMD was low, our data suggests the 2015 MHRA surveillance is not cost-effective. We therefore have concerns about the increasingly intensive surveillance recommended in the 2017 MHRA guidance for all metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients

We compared the medium-term clinical and radiological results of hybrid total hip replacement (THR) with metal-on-metal Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) in two groups of 54 young patients matched for age, gender, body mass index and pre-operative levels of activity. The clinical outcome was assessed by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EuroQol scores. Radiologically, all hips were assessed for migration and osteolysis, the hybrid THRs for polyethylene wear and the BHRs for a pedestal sign. The mean follow-up of the patients with a hybrid THR was ten years and for those with a BHR, nine years. Four patients with a hybrid THR and one with a BHR had died. In each group five were lost to follow-up. The revision rate of the hybrid THRs was 16.7% (9 of 54) and of the BHRs 9.3% (5 of 54) (p = 0.195). Radiographs of a further eight hybrid THRs demonstrated wear and osteolysis, and they await revision (p = 0.008). Of the unrevised BHRs 90% had radiological changes, of which approximately 50% had progressed over the previous four years. All hybrid THRs demonstrated linear polyethylene wear with a mean of 1.24 mm (0.06 to 3.03). The BHRs recorded superior OHS (p = 0.013), UCLA (p = 0.008), and EuroQol visual analogue scores (p = 0.009). After nine years, patients with BHRs remained more active and had a lower rate of revision than those with hybrid THRs. Both groups demonstrated progressive radiological changes at medium-term follow-up

We compared the long-term clinical and radiological results of hybrid total hip replacement (THR) with metal-on-metal Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) in two groups of 54 young patients matched for age, gender, body mass index and pre-operative levels of activity. The clinical outcome was assessed by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EuroQol scores. Radiologically, all hips were assessed for migration and osteolysis, the hybrid THRs for polyethylene wear and the BHRs for a pedestal sign. The mean follow-up of the patients with a hybrid THR was 16 years and for those with a BHR, 15 years. 12 patients with a hybrid THR and 6 with a BHR had died. 2 patients with a BHR refused follow up but remain unrevised and 5 were lost to follow-up, as was 1 with a hybrid THR. The revision rate of the hybrid THRs was 28% (15 of 54) and of the BHRs 11% (6 of 54) (p = 0.029). Radiographs of a further 13 hybrid THRs demonstrated wear and osteolysis but are functioning well and are under observation. Of the unrevised BHRs 96% had radiological changes, of which approximately 17% had progressed over the previous 6 years. All hybrid THRs demonstrated linear polyethylene wear with a mean of 1.84mm (0.06 to 2.6). The BHRs recorded superior OHS (p = 0.03), UCLA (p = 0.0096), and EuroQol visual analogue scores (p = 0.03). After 15 years, patients with BHRs remained more active and had a lower rate of revision and death than those with hybrid THRs. Both groups demonstrated progressive radiological changes at long-term follow-up

Recent studies have demonstrated that implant-specific blood metal ion thresholds exist in unilateral and bilateral metal-on-metal (MoM) hip arthroplasty patients, with these thresholds being most effective for identifying patients at low-risk of adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). We investigated whether these new blood metal ion thresholds could effectively identify patients at risk of ARMD in an external cohort of MoM hip arthroplasty patients. We performed a validation study involving 803 MoM hip arthroplasties implanted in 710 patients at three European centres (323=unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR); 93=bilateral BHR; 294=unilateral Corail-Pinnacle). All patients underwent whole blood metal ion sampling. Patients were divided into those with ARMD (revised for ARMD or ARMD on imaging; n=75), and those without ARMD (n=635). Previously devised implant-specific blood metal ion thresholds (cobalt=2.15μg/l for unilateral BHR; maximum cobalt or chromium=5.5μg/l for bilateral BHR; cobalt=3.57μg/l for unilateral Corail-Pinnacle) were applied to the validation cohort, with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis used to establish the discriminatory characteristics for each respective threshold. The area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for distinguishing between patients with and without ARMD for each implant-specific threshold were respectively: unilateral BHR=89.4% (95% CI=82.8%-96.0%), 78.9%, 86.7%, 44.1%, 96.9%; bilateral BHR=89.2% (95% CI=81.3%-97.1%), 70.6%, 86.8%, 54.5%, 93.0%; unilateral Corail-Pinnacle=76.9% (95% CI=63.9%-90.0%), 65.0%, 85.4%, 24.5%, 97.1%. The 7μg/l UK MHRA threshold missed significantly more patients with ARMD compared with the implant-specific thresholds (4.9% vs. 2.8%; p=0.0003). This external multi-centre validation study has confirmed that MoM hip arthroplasty patients with blood metal ion levels below newly devised implant-specific thresholds have a low-risk of ARMD. Compared to implant-specific thresholds, the currently proposed fixed MHRA threshold missed more patients with ARMD. We recommend using implant-specific thresholds over fixed thresholds when managing MoM hip arthroplasty patients

Introduction. In the early 2000s hip resurfacing became an established bone conserving hip arthroplasty option particularly for the fit and active patient cohort. The performance of second-generation metal-on-metal bearings had led to the reintroduction of hip resurfacing. The Birmingham Hip resurfacing (BHR) was introduced in 1997. This was followed by a number of different designs of the hip resurfacing. The Durom hip resurfacing was introduced in 2001. These two designs had different metallurgical properties, design parameters particularly clearance and different implantation techniques. Data from joint registries show that both prosthesis perform well. Objectives. Our objective was to perform a retrospective survival analysis comparing the Birmingham to the Durom hip resurfacing and analyse the mode of failures of the cases revised. Methods. Data was collected prospectively but analysed retrospectively. The two cohorts comprised patients treated by two senior surgeons at different units. The follow up range was 1 to 14 years with a mean of 10 years. The end-point was revision for any cause. However this was further substratified. Results. The outcome of all patients was known. The two cohorts exhibited no significant difference in demographics. No failures in either cohort were attributed to adverse reaction to metal debris. Revision for any cause was analysed by plotting Kaplan-Meier Survival curves. The Durom cohort (n=273) had 5 deaths and 9 revisions. The Birmingham cohort (n=567) had 5 deaths and 22 revisions. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the two resurfacing designs were different. The Durom cohort demonstrated a concave curve with more early failures. This was contrary to the BHR's convex curve with higher incidence of late failures. We analysed the data by substratifying into failure of femoral or acetabular component and neck fractures. Conclusions. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrates that the Durom hip resurfacings had a higher rate of early failure. However extrapolation of the curves suggests that the Durom may have a superior long term survival compared to the BHR. We postulate that this may be due to the femoral implantation technique with less late failures in Duroms and an apparent acceleration of failures in BHR cohort around the ten year stage. Joint registry data also reflect this pattern

The ODEP (Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel) rating system should offer a surgeon and patient extra information when making a choice on which implant to use. However, in the current economic environment, ratings may also influence implant choice by contracting bodies. Our aim was to determine the performance of commonly used Acetabular and femoral components in our unit and compare these to their published ODEP ratings (or absence of rating). We analysed all of the following primary THR components (12,792) for revision for any reason, using same date ranges as ODEP where more than 100 implantations had occurred. Hip components: Trinity (3A in 2013), Trilogy (10A* in 2016), Atlas (10A in 2013), Trilogy TMT (10A 2010) Durom (not rated), BHR (10A, 2010), ACCIS (not rated); Femoral components: Taperfit (10A in 2013), Taperloc (10A* in 2016), Metafix (3A in 2013), CPT (10A in 2012), Ecofit (not Rated), ESOP (not rated), Minihip (3A 2013), Durom (not rated), BHR (10A 2010), ACCIS (not rated). Analysis of Kaplan Meier survival curves was undertaken for all components. The rated components and non-rated components were compared using HR and logrank tests for all time groups when ratings were introduced. No statistical difference was observed in any group except for the Trinity cup which had a 98.2% (1344 cups) survival at 6 years. Component survival in our unit was better than ODEP suggested failure for A category of not more than 1% per year, for all components. Whilst we applaud the intention to improve data available for prostheses, the present ODEP system does not distinguish between performances of different implants in our unit. We therefore recommend care when relying upon ODEP ratings to make clinical or contracting decisions

We report the long-term survival and functional outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in patients aged < 50 years at operation, and explore the factors affecting survival. Between 1997 and 2006, a total of 447 BHRs were implanted in 393 patients (mean age 41.5 years (14.9 to 49.9)) by one designing surgeon. The mean follow-up was 10.1 years (5.2 to 14.7), with no loss to follow-up. In all, 16 hips (3.6%) in 15 patients were revised, giving an overall cumulative survival of 96.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 93.7 to 98.3) at ten years and 94.1% (95% CI 84.9 to 97.3) at 14 years. Using aseptic revision as the endpoint, the survival for men with primary osteoarthritis (n = 195) was 100% (95% CI 100 to 100) at both ten years and 14 years, and in women with primary osteoarthritis (n = 109) it was 96.1% (95% CI 90.1 to 99.9) at ten years and 91.2% (95% CI 68.6 to 98.7) at 14 years. Female gender (p = 0.047) and decreasing femoral head size (p = 0.044) were significantly associated with an increased risk of revision. The median Oxford hip score (OHS, modified as a percentage with 100% indicating worst outcome) at last follow-up was 4.2% (46 of 48; interquartile range (IQR) 0% to 24%) and the median University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score was 6.0 (IQR 5 to 8). Men had significantly better OHS (p = 0.02) and UCLA scores (p = 0.01) than women. The BHR provides excellent survival and functional results in men into the second decade, with good results achieved in appropriately selected women. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1172–7