My experience with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing began in July 2000 and continues to this day for selected cases including OA, AVN, CDH and also following old fracture deformity and Femoral/Pelvic osteotomy. Early on, the criteria for patient selection expanded with increasing experience and positive acceptance by patients but then moderated as adverse reports including those from our National Joint Replacement Registry suggested a need for caution with Surface Replacement. Over 10 years, (July 2000 — July 2010), a personal series of 243 BHRs were followed (169 male — 74 female) with only one return to theatre in that time (4 days post op. to revise a poorly seated acetabular cup in a dysplastic socket). There were no femoral neck fractures in that 10 year period but 3 femoral cap/stem lucencies were known (2 female-1 male) with insignificant symptoms to require revision. The complete 10 year series of cases were then matched in the Australian National Joint Replacement Registry. No other revisions were identified by the Registry for all 243 cases. Soon after completing this encouraging outcome study however 3 revision procedures have been necessary (2 for sudden late head/neck failure including one of the three with known cap/stem lucencies and one for suspected pseudotumour/ALVAL). One healing stress fracture of the femoral neck and another further cap/stem loosening have also presented recently but with little in the way of symptoms at this stage. Surprisingly, there is little indication which case is likely to present with problems even in the presence of many cases done earlier where one would be cautious now to use a BHR but which have ongoing good outcomes. (e.g., AVN or the elderly osteoporotic patient). My journey therefore with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing over that first 10 years has been very positive and I believe it retains an important place for the younger patient with good bone quality. However it has become only recently apparent in my series of 243 cases that late onset unpredictable problems can arise which is likely to further narrow my selection criteria for this procedure. The likely outcome will be that it will have a more limited place in my joint replacement practice despite the very positive early experience

A concern of metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is long term exposure to Cobalt (Co) and Chromium (CR) wear debris from the bearing. This study compares whole blood metal ion levels from patients drawn at one-year following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) to levels taken at a minimum 10-year follow-up. A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent a BHR for osteoarthritis with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Whole blood metal ion levels were drawn at final follow-up in June 2019. These results were compared to values from patients with one-year metal ion levels. Of the 211 patients who received a BHR, 71 patients (54 males and 17 females) had long term metal ion levels assessed (mean follow-up 12.7 +/− 1.4 years). The mean Co and Cr levels for patients with unilateral BHRs (43 males and 13 females) were 3.12 ± 6.31 ug/L and 2.62 ± 2.69 ug/L, respectively, and 2.78 ± 1.02 ug/L and 1.83 ± 0.65 ug/L for patients with bilateral BHRs (11 males and 4 females). Thirty-five patients (27 male and 8 female) had metal-ion levels tested at one-year postoperatively. The mean changes in Co and Cr levels were 2.29 ug/l (p = 0.0919) and 0.57 (p = 0.1612), respectively, at one year compared to long-term. These changes were not statistically significant. This study reveals that whole blood metal ion levels do not change significantly when comparing one-year and ten-year Co and Cr levels. These ion levels appear to reach a steady state at one year. Our results also suggest that regular metal-ion testing as per current Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) guidelines may be impractical for asymptomatic patients. Metal-ion levels, in and of themselves, may in fact possess little utility in determining the risk of failure and should be paired with radiographic and clinical findings to determine the need for revision

Introduction. The results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device in several series reveal that the predominant mode of failure is femoral neck fracture or femoral head collapse and that careful patient selection and precise operative technique are vital to the success of this procedure. In this report we consider the results of BHR in patients with severe arthritis secondary to femoral head AVN. Methods. This was a single-surgeon consecutive series of BHRs with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Fifty-nine patients with Ficat-Arlet grade III or IV femoral head AVN (66 hips) and treated with BHRs at a mean age of 43.9 years (range 19 to 67.7 years) were followed up for 5.4 to 9.6 years (mean 7.1 years). No patient died and none was lost to follow-up. Revision for any reason was the end-point and unrevised patients were assessed with Oxford hip scores. They were also reviewed clinically and with AP and lateral radiographs. Results. There were five failures in this cohort, giving a failure rate of 7.6% and a cumulative survivorship of 86% at 9.6 years. In one further patient the femoral component has tilted into varus from further collapse of the femoral head. He is asymptomatic but knows that he will need a revision if he develops symptoms. No other patient shows clinical or radiological adverse signs. Discussion. Several studies have shown that the results of arthroplasty are generally worse in AVN as compared to those in osteoarthritis. Reviewing the above results it appears to us that the relatively poorer cumulative survival observed in patients with a diagnosis of AVN (86%) compared to those with other diagnoses make AVN a relative contraindication to the hip resurfacing procedure

Introduction. Secondary osteoarthritis in a dysplastic hip is a surgical challenge. Severe leg length discrepancies and torsional deformities add to the problem of inadequate bony support available for the socket. Furthermore, many of these patients are young and wish to remain active, thereby jeopardising the long-term survival of any arthroplasty device. For such severely dysplastic hips, the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) device provides the option of a dysplasia component, a hydroxyapatite-coated porous uncemented socket with two lugs to engage neutralisation screws for supplementary fixation into the solid bone of the ilium more medially. The gap between the superolateral surface of the socket component and the false acetabulum is filled with impacted bone graft. Methods and results. One hundred and thirteen consecutive dysplasia BHRs performed by the senior author (DJWM) for the treatment of severely arthritic hips with Crowe grade II and III dysplasia between 1997 and 2000 have been reviewed at a minimum five year follow-up. There were 106 patients (59M and 47F). Eighty of the 113 hips were old CDH or DDH, 29 were destructive primary or secondary arthritis with wandering acetabulae and four were old fracture dislocations of the hip. Mean age at operation was 47.5 years (range 21 to 68 years – thirty-six men and forty-four women were below the age of 55 years). There were two failures (1.8%) out of the 113 hips at a mean follow-up of 6.5 years (range 5 to 8.3 years). One hip failed with a femoral neck fracture nine days after the operation and another failed due to deep infection at 3.3 years. Conclusion. The dysplasia resurfacing device offers a good conservative arthroplasty option for these severely deficient hips

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is emerging as an increasingly popular, conservative option for the treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis in the young and active patient. Despite the encouraging clinical results of hip resurfacing, aseptic loosening and femoral neck fracture remains concerns for the success of this procedure. This study used finite element analysis (FEA) to analyse the stresses within proximal femoral bone resulting from implantation with a conservative hip prosthesis. FEA is a computational method used to analyse the performance of real-world structures through the development of simplified computational models using essential features. The aim of this study was to examine the correlation between the orientation of the femoral component of a hip resurfacing prosthesis (using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing as a model) and outcomes during both walking and stair climbing. The outcomes of interest were stresses in the femoral neck predisposing to fracture, and bone remodelling within the proximal femur. Multiple three-dimensional finite element models of a resurfaced femur were generated, with stem-shaft angles representing anatomic (135°), valgus (145°), and varus (125°) angulations. Applied loading conditions included normal walking and stair climbing. Bone remodelling was assessed in both the medial and lateral cortices. Analyses revealed that amongst all orientations, valgus positioning produced the most physiological stress patterns within these regions, thereby encouraging bone growth. Stress concentration was observed in cortical and cancellous bone regions adjacent to the rim of the prosthesis. As one would expect, stair climbing produced consistently higher stress than walking. The highest stress values occurred in the varus-orientated femur during both walking and stair climbing, whilst anatomic angulation resulted in the lowest stress values of all implanted femurs in comparison to the intact femur. This study has shown through the use of FEA that optimising the stem-shaft angle towards a valgus orientation is recommended when implanting a hip resurfacing arthroplasty. This positioning produces physiological stress patterns within the proximal femur that are conducive to bone growth, thus reducing the risk of femoral neck fracture associated with conservative hip arthroplasty

Introduction. Hip resurfacing (HRA) designer centres have reported survivorships between 88.5–96% at 12 years. Arthroplasty Registries (AR) reported less favourable results especially in females gender and small sizes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the minimum 10-year survival and outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) from an independent specialist centre. Methods. Since 1998, 1967 BHRs have been implanted in our centre by a single hip resurfacing specialist. The first 249 BHR, implanted between 1999 and 2001 in 232 patients (17 bilateral) were included in this study. The majority of the patients were male (163; 69%). The mean age at surgery was 50.6 years (range: 17–76), with primary OA as most common indication (201; 81%), followed by avascular necrosis (23; 9.2%) and hip dysplasia (11; 4.4%). Mean follow up was 10.2 years (range: 0.1 (revision) to 13.1). Implant survival was established with revision as the end point. Harris Hip Scores (HHS), radiographs and metal ion levels were assessed in all patients. Sub-analysis was performed by gender, diagnosis and femoral component size (Small: <50 mm; Large: ≥50 mm). Results. Of the 232 patients, 15 were deceased (4 bilateral BHR), 16 lost to follow-up and 9 revised. 205 BHR were evaluated at minimum 10 years postoperatively. Failure modes included 2 component malpositioning, 2 loose femoral heads, 1 fracture, 1 metal sensitivity, 2 impingement and 1 with high metal ions. The overall survival was 95.1% (95% CI: 93.6–96.6) at 12.8 years. The mean HHS was 97.8 (range: 65–100). Survivorship in men was 98.6% (95%CI: 97.4–99.8%) at 13 years. Survivorship in women was inferior to men (log rank = 0.003): 87.9% (95%CI: 84.3–91.5%) at 12 years. There was no difference in HHS between genders in the non-revised cases (p = 0.46). There was no difference in survivorship with different pre-operative diagnosis (log-rank = 0.83) but a significant difference in 12-year survivorship between Small (90.1%) and Large components (97.2%) (log rank = 0.01). After adjusting for head size, the difference in survival between males and females was no longer significant (log-rank = 0.125). The median ion levels were Cr:2.0μg/l; Co:1.0μg/l. In 24 patients the ion levels were undetectable. Four patients (1.9%) had ions above the upper acceptable limits of Cr:4.6μg/l;Co:4.0μg/l for unilateral or Cr:7.4μg/l;Co:5.0μg/l for bilateral HRA. In 67 patients with consecutive ion measurements, levels decreased significantly with time with a mean decrease of 0.97μg/l for Cr and 0.60μg/l for Co. Discussion. This study reports the more than 10-year survival of BHR and reflects an experienced specialist's practice, including his learning curve of the procedure. The overall 12.8-year survival was superior to registry reported figures of THA amongst young patients and corresponded well with reports from designer centres. Survivorship and clinical outcome were excellent in men. In women survivorship was significantly inferior and related to smaller component sizes, but the >10-year clinical outcome in non-revised cases was excellent. In well-functioning BHR, the metal ions decrease significantly with time. The results of this study support the use of HRA with a good design

Purpose

Despite the increasing interest and subsequent published literature on hip resurfacing arthroplasty, little is known about the prevalence of its complications and in particular the less common modes of failure. The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of failure of hip resurfacing arthroplasty and to analyse the reasons for it.

The metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing arthroplasty is a good solution for the younger patient with osteoarthritis of the hip. It is effective in pain resolution and provides a good function.

Our study of 300 BHR arthroplasties with a follow-up of 2 to 7 year shows good results in a young and active population.

With an overall survival of 96.7% we obtained similar results to those of the design centre. The overall postoperative HHS score of 95.78 +/− 12.63 is in line with other studies. We noticed a similar increase in HHS in female patients and male patients.

Even in the HOOS scores there was no significant difference between both groups. This is an important finding for the surgeon as well as the patients.

Looking at the VAS scores for satisfaction or reoperation we could state that the high expectations of this population have been fulfilled.

With have an acceptable revision rate of 2.42% the patients undergoing a revision were of a simular mean age than those in the overall group. Five of them are female, two are male. Since there were twice as many female as male patients there is little difference in revision percentage between both groups.

There was 1 patient with a bilateral revision because of ALVAL (aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis associated lesion).

Although femoral neck fractures are a known complication, there where none in our series.

Patients are able to lead an active life and perform sports. The postoperative benefits are equal in men and women. The satisfaction rate confirms that we are able to meet the expectations in this high demand group.

Birmingham Metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing (BHR) is a bone-conserving option for patients with advanced articular damage. While the outcomes of Total Hip Replacement (THR) are well documented, there is a paucity of literature comparing the patient reported outcomes of BHR versus THR. This study aims to compare the patient reported outcomes for an impact on quality of life between patients who had a BHR vs. THR after correcting for selection bias.

Patients who underwent a BHR or THR between July 2003 and December 2006 were included. Patient questionnaires included demographic details, co-morbidities, WOMAC, SF-36 Scores. In addition, a 4 point Likert scale was used to measure satisfaction post-operatively. The above data was collected pre-operatively and at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years post-operatively. Data was analysed with SPSS (version 19) software package. All analysis was adjusted for Age, gender, Co-morbidity and pre-operative score by using Multivariate regression analysis using a General Liner Model to rule out the effect of these predictors on outcomes between groups.

337 patients were included (205 for THR and 132 for BHR). BHR patients were younger than THR patients (49 vs. 67 years, p<0.01), were more likely to be male (68% vs. 42% of THR, p<0.01), reported fewer co-morbidities (1.06 vs. 1.59, p<0.01). BHR patients reported better WOMAC pain and function scores at 5 years (p<0.05). For SF-36 scores, BHR patients reported higher scores for all 8 domains at 1 year and 5 year follow up (p<0.05). BHR patients reported higher satisfaction than THR group for return to Activities of Daily Living and Recreational activities at 1 and 5 years (p<0.05)

After correction for patient variability, BHR patients reported better improvement in pain and function and enjoyed a better quality of life in relation to return to ADL and recreational activities over to 5 years post-surgery.

The Birmingham mid-head hip resurfacing arthroplasty (Smith & Nephew, Tennessee) (BMHR) is designed for use in patients with avascular necrosis of the femoral head. The BMHR has limited short-mid term follow-up results. We report the experience of 27 consecutive BMHR procedures with a minimum two year follow-up.

23 patients (20 males and 3 females) with an average operation age of 49.8 years (SD ±10.9) (22–65) were investigated. The mean follow-up period was 3.0 years (SD ±0.77). The operations were between April 2008 and November 2011 by one surgeon. Data and outcome measurements were collected prospectively and analysed retrospectively. Procedures were reviewed to determine function. We evaluated Harris Hip Scores, Short Form-36 (SF-36v2) Scores, Tegner Activity Score Scores and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Scores (WOMAC) comparatively at preoperative, six month and yearly intervals. Paired samples t-tests were applied to determine improvements where p<0.05 was deemed as significant.

There were no patient deaths. There were no revisions. Harris Hip scores for pre-operative 6, 12, 24 and 36 month intervals were: 52.30, 84.14, 83.07, 87.50 and 89.50. Average pre-operative 6, 12, 24 and 36 month SF36v2 Total scores were: 116.54, 124.32, 130.44, 135.97 and 133.18. Tegner scores for pre-operative 2.75, 3.29, 3.00, 3.67 and 3.01. WOMAC Total scores for aforementioned intervals for the posterior approach were: 59.51, 84.22, 90.30, 86.86 and 92.25.

The mean Harris Hip scores improved significantly between preoperative and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months (p<0.001). The mean SF-36v2 physical scores improved significantly between preoperative and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months (p<0.016). WOMAC scores improved significantly between preoperative and 6, 12, 24 and 36 months (p<0.017).

The presence of avascular necrosis significantly increases the revision rate for hip resurfacing surgery. The BMHR prosthesis, in this short term follow-up, appears to avoid the main cause of failure, femoral component loosening. Longer term efficacy remains to be seen. We plan to continue close supervision of these patients.

Choice of implant for patients aged sixty-five years or younger requiring hip arthroplasty is a topic of current debate, those in favor of resurfacing maintain it offers a greater range of motion and activity. We examined the Oxford Hip Score's (OHS) and Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) of patients undergoing either total hip replacement (THR) using an Elite Plus Stem, or hip resurfacing using a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR). The THR cohort comprised 34 implants (4 bilateral), 17 men, 17 women, mean age 56.08 years. The resurfacing cohort comprised 27 implants (3 bilateral), 18 men, 9 women, mean age 50.51 years. The mean difference calculated between pre- and post-operative OHS was 22.08 and 25.33 for the THR and resurfacing cohorts respectively. The mean Duke score was 42.3 and 53 for the cohorts respectively. Using the pre-operative and post-operative change in Oxford Hip Scores, no statistically significant difference was found between the THR and resurfacing cohorts (p = 0.2891). There was a statistically difference found between the THR and resurfacing cohorts with regards to activity using post-operative Duke scores, (p = 0.0047). This study has emphasized the use of the DASI, a pure activity score, in hip research. In terms of reducing pain, both prostheses appear equally effective. With regards to activity, as evidenced by utilizing a pure activity score, the resurfacing cohort faired better. Our study suggests at one year post-op, young patients with a resurfacing have a greater activity level than those with a THR

Background. Post-market surveillance is necessary to ensure the safety and efficacy of newly introduced technologies and implants. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (Smith and Nephew, Inc., Memphis, TN) was the first hip resurfacing implant approved for use by the US FDA in May 2006. A prospective, multi-center postmarket approval study has been in progress to assess safety and efficacy of this implant. Methods. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were enrolled at five sites. Clinical evaluation and radiographs were obtained at 3 months and 1 year, and annually thereafter for a total of 10 years. Blood metal ion levels were measured at 1 year and 4 years. Results. 265 patients have been enrolled thus far with 193 males; 28 patients have had bilateral procedures. The average age of the patients is 51.3 years (range 22–72). There have been 7 revisions (2.4%) in the entire cohort to date: 2 were for femoral neck fracture, 2 were for acetabular loosening; 1 was for femoral head osteonecrosis; 1 was revised on the day of surgery for errant implant placement; and 1 was for pseudotumor. K-M survival curves for the cohort are 97.8% at 5 years (Figure 1); men had 99% survival, while women had 94.5%. Whole blood metal ion analysis revealed a median cobalt and chromium levels of 1.5 ppb and 1.7 ppb at 1 year. There was a significant difference between the metal levels in men and women, however women also had smaller component sizes. Furthermore, a significantly higher percentage of female patients had outlier metal ion levels > 7 ppb. Conclusions. This hip resurfacing device has demonstrated safety and efficacy comparable to THR, in this multicenter postmarket approval study. A gender difference in the survival rate and median metal ion levels does exist; therefore, it is important to continue close monitoring of this cohort to determine longer term results

It's easy to say that hip resurfacing is a failed technology. Journals and lay press are replete with negative reports concerning metal-on-metal bearing failures, destructive pseudotumors, withdrawals and recalls. Reviews of national joint registries show revision risks with hip resurfacing exceeding those of traditional total hip replacement, and metal bearings fare worst among all bearing couples. Yet, that misses the point. Modern hip resurfacing was never meant to replace total hip replacement (THR). It was intended to preserve bone in young patients who would be expected to need multiple revisions due to their youth and high-demand activities. The stated goal of the developers of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) was to delay THR by 10 years. In the two decades that followed the release of BHR, this goal has been met and exceeded. Much has been learned about indications, patient selection, and surgical technique. We now know that this highly specialised, challenging procedure is best indicated in the young, active male with osteoarthritis, as a complementary, not competitive procedure, to THR. Resurfacing has many advantages. First and foremost, it saves bone, on the day of surgery, and over the next several years by preventing stress shielding. Dislocations are very rare. Leg length discrepancy and changes in offset are avoided. Post-operative activity, including heavy manual labor and contact sports, is unrestricted. More normal loading of the femur and joint stability has allowed professional athletes to regain their careers. Femoral side revisions, if necessary, are simple total hips, and dual mobility constructs allow one to keep the socket. Adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD), including pseudotumors, have generated great concern. Initially described only in women, it was unclear whether the etiology was allergy, toxicity, or inflammation. A better understanding of the wear properties of the bearing, and its relation to size, anteversion, hip dysplasia and metallurgy, along with retrieval analysis, allow us to conclude that it is excessive wear due to edge loading which is the fundamental mechanism for the vast majority of ARMD. Thus, patient selection, implant selection and surgical technique, the orthopaedic triad, are paramount. What has been most impressive are the truly exceptional results in young, active men. The worst candidates for THR turn out to be the best candidates for resurfacing. The ability to return to full, unrestricted activity is just as important to these patients as the spectacular survivorship in centers specializing in resurfacing. If they are unlucky and face a revision, they are not facing the life-changing outcomes of a long revision femoral stem. So if the best indication for hip resurfacing is the young, active male, let's look at the results of resurfacing these patients in centers with high volumes, using devices with a good track record, such as BHR. Several centers around the world report 10–18 year success rates of BHR in males under 50 at 98–100%. Return to athletics is routinely achieved, and even professional athletes have regained their careers. Hip resurfacing doesn't have to be better than THR to be popular among patients. Just the idea of saving all that bone makes it attractive. In the young active male, however, the results exceed those of THR, while leaving better revision options for the future. This justifies its continued use in this challenging patient population

BACKGROUND. We originally performed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing using a Townley designed Vitallium Total Articular Replacement Arthroplasty (TARA) curved stemmed prosthesis. Neither the acetabular or femoral components were cemented or had porous coating. The bearing surfaces were consistently polar bearing. The surgical objectives were to preserve bone stock, maintain normal anatomy and mechanics of the hip joint and to approximate the normal stress transmission to the supporting femoral bone. The functional objectives were better sports participation, less thigh pain and limp, less perception of a leg length difference and a greater perception of a normal hip. Metal-on-metal was selected to conserve acetabular bone and avoid polyethylene associated osteolysis. Relatively few cases were performed until the Conserve Plus and later the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing systems became available. METHODS. We examined the results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patient with at least 10 years of follow-up and an age less than 50 at the time of surgery. We did not have access to the Birmingham Prosthesis until 2006. We performed 101 TARA procedures and 397 Conserve Plus procedures for 357 patients. For the combined series the mean age was 43 and 62% of patients were male. 34 patients had a conventional total hip replacement on the contralateral side. We used both the anterolateral and posterior approaches. All acetabular components were placed without cement and all the Conserve Plus Femoral Components were cemented. RESULTS. There were no implant related failures with the TARA prosthesis. The average Harris Hip Score was 93. There were 2 revisions for femoral neck fracture at years 8 and 14 and one revision for infection. There was one dislocation but no instance of implant loosening. There were 29 (7%) revisions with the Conserve Plus Prosthesis. 14 revisions were for adverse reactions to metal wear debris and 10 of these patients had femoral components of size 46 mm or smaller. There were 5 revisions for acetabular loosening and 3 for femoral loosening. There were 7 revisions for femoral neck fracture and infection. The limb lengths were measured to be within 1 cm of equal in 98% of patients. 95% of patients had a UCLA activity score above 6 and 96% of patients rated their outcome excellent or good. 32 of 34 patients preferred their hip resurfacing to total hip replacement. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 93%. Narrowing of the femoral neck was seen in 9% of patients but acetabular osteolysis was not seen. Signs of impingement of the femoral neck against the acetabular prosthesis were seen in 14% of patients. CONCLUSIONS. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has been performed for more than 40 years using predicate prostheses such as the Townley TARA. The results of metal-on-metal resurfacing are favorable even in young and very active individuals. There were no instances of medical illness related to metal-on-metal implants with up to 41 years of follow-up. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has favorable outcomes at 10 years. There is an increased chance of an adverse reaction to metal wear debris with femoral component sizes 46 mm or smaller

Bone ingrowth fixation of large diameter, beaded cobalt chromium cups is generally considered to be reliable but this is typically judged radiographically. To date, implant retrieval data of attached bone has been limited. This study evaluated correlations between the pre-revision radiographic appearance and the measured amount of bone attachment on one design of porous coated cup. Methods. Twenty-six monoblock, CoCr Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR, Smith and Nephew, TN, USA) cups with macroscopic beads and hydroxyapatite coating were studied. Seventeen were revised for acetabular malposition with the remainder revised for femoral loosening (4), pain (1), infection (1), dislocation (1) or lysis (2). Median time to revision was 35 months (10 – 70 months). Ten patients were female; the median age of all patients was 54 years. The pre-revision radiographs were visually ranked for cup-bone integration as follows: 0 = none, 1 = < 50%, 2 = 50 – 75%, 3 = 76 – 95%, 4 = > 96% integration. Rankings were made for the superior and inferior aspects, without knowledge of the appearance of bone on the retrievals. The revised cups were photographed at an angle so the dome and the cup periphery were visualized. The area of bone in four equal segments in each of the superior and inferior aspects was measured with image analysis software. A probe was used to differentiate bone from soft tissue. Only bone that covered the beads was counted. Correlation coefficients were calculated for the radiographic and image analysis data. Results. Radiographically, most cups were assessed as having more than 50% of bone attachment and 7 cups were ranked as having almost total integration with bone. Only 2 cups were assessed radiographically as fully loose. Measured total bone attachment ranged from none to 55%. Superior and inferior percent ingrowth were highly correlated (corr=0.68, p<0.001) but there was no correlation between percent bone and x-ray rank (inferior corr=0.01, p=0.96; superior corr=0.23, p=0.26). There was no correlation between cup malpositioning as a reason for revision and x-ray integration ranking (superior p=0.34; inferior p=0.80). Discussion. Despite the radiographic appearance of good fixation, there was little or no correlation between percent area of actual bone attachment and x-ray appearance. One study limitation is the assumption that attached bone was indeed integrated with the beads as destructive sectioning was not done to verify this. Published autopsy retrieval studies have shown that even a small amount of actual ingrowth can provide clinically successful fixation. Another possible limitation was the variable quality of the radiographs. Never-the-less these results raise questions about the accuracy of radiographic analysis of bone fixation. The possibility that inadequate fixation is a cause for pain leading to revision should be considered even when the radiographic appearance indicates otherwise

The surgical treatment of young adults with end-stage hip disease has been a challenge. Inferior THA survival in the young, perceived advantages of hip resurfacing versus THA and advancements in tribology, led to the introduction of 3rd generation Metal-on-Metal-Hip-Resurfacing-Arthroplasty (MoMHRA). To-date, thousands of such prostheses have been implanted worldwide in younger patients, yet little is known regarding long-term outcome. The only studies reporting greater than 10 year outcome come from designer centres with survivorship varying between 88.5–96% at 12 years. Arthroplasty Registries (AR) have reported less favourable survivorships with female gender and size having a negative effect on survival. In our independent hip resurfacing centre in Ghent, Belgium, a single surgeon has implanted more than 3500 HRA over more than 12 years. A cohort of 149 patients who received a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) at a mean age of 50 years at surgery have now reached a minimum 10 years follow-up. The overall 12-year survival in these young adults is 93.1% (95% CI: 88.3–98.0), 99% in males and 87.3% in females. These survivorship data are superior to registry reported figures of THA amongst young patients and correspond well with previous reports from designer centres. The long-term survivorship and clinical outcome of the BHR are excellent in men, uninfluenced by preoperative diagnosis or age. However, survivorship in women is inferior and usually related to increased wear and reactions to metal debris. Malpositioning of components with associated wear-induced soft tissue fluid collections is the most frequent factor leading to failure of a HRA. In our experience, mid-term outcome following revision is good and complication and re-revision rates can be low. Surgical experience, early intervention in cases of mal-positioned implants, clinical use of ion levels, implantation of larger ceramic-on-ceramic THA femoral heads and patient education are factors in improving outcome and reducing complication and re-revisions following HRA revision

Introduction. Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (HRA) has been performed in the United States for over 10 years and is an alternative to standard Total Hip Arthropastly (THA). It is appealing to younger patients with end stage osteoarthritis who seek to maintain active lifestyles. Benefits of HRA versus THR include a larger femoral ball size, potential to return to impact activities, decreased dislocation rates, and restoration of normal hip biomechanics. Patients ≤50 years old are a particularly challenging patient group to treat with THA because of their young age and high activity level, and as such, are well-suited for HRA. However, there are limited reports in the literature about clinical, radiographic and functional outcomes for this patient cohort. We present results of a clinical investigation at our institution for this patient cohort with minimum 5-year follow up, including long term survivorship and outcome scores. Methods. HRA, using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), was performed for 538 procedures between 2006–2009 by a single surgeon at a United States teaching hospital. After Institutional Review Board approval, medical and radiographic study records were retrospectively reviewed. Harris Hip Scores (HHS) were routinely collected. Patients who had not returned for follow-up examination were contacted by telephone for information pertaining to their status and implant, and a modified HHS was also administered. A Kaplan Meier survival curve was constructed to evaluate time to revision. Statistical analysis was performed (SAS version 9.3; SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Results. Of the 538 patients who underwent HRA from 2006–2009, 238 were aged ≤50 years (44%). Five-year follow up data was obtained from 209 of these patients (88%), using medical record documentation, and telephone survey as needed. The mean follow-up for all patients was 6 years (range 5–8 years). A total of 3% (8/238) were revised. Reasons included: (i) femoral loosening in 4, (ii) Iliopsoas impingement in 1, (iii) metallosis/adverse tissue reaction in 1, (iv) femoral neck fracture following motor vehicle accident in 1, and (v) unknown reasons in 1. Of the 238 patients, 55 (23%) were female, 2 (2/55; 3.6%) of whom have since undergone revision surgery for either metallosis/adverse tissue reaction, or unknown reasons. Of the 53 women who retained their BHR at 5-year follow up, the average HHS was 96.5. Of the 238 patients, 183 (77%) were male patients, 6 (6/183; 3.2%) of whom have since undergone revision surgery for femoral component loosening, iliopsoas impingement, or femoral neck fracture sustained in a motor vehicle accident. At 5-year follow-up, 177 male patients retained their implant and had an average Harris Hip Score of 98.8. The overall implant survival was 96.6% at approximately 5 years. Conclusion. In our cohort of patients aged ≤50 treated with BHR [Fig. 1], our results demonstrated 5-year survivorship of 96.6%, with average HHS of 98.8 in males and 96.5 in females. This study demonstrates HRA is a successful alternative to traditional THA in a challenging cohort of younger, active patients

Introduction. Patients presenting with osteoarthritis as late sequelae following pediatric hip trauma have few options aside from standard Total Hip Replacement (THR). For younger more active patients, Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (HRA) can be offered as an alternative. HRA has been performed in the United States over the past decade and allows increased bone preservation, decreased hip dislocation rates versus THR, and potential to return to full activities. Patients presenting with end-stage hip arthritis as following prior pediatric trauma or disease often have altered hip morphology making HRA more complicated. Often Legg-Calve-Perthes (LCP) patients present with short, wide femoral necks, and femoral head distortion including coxa magna or coxa plana. There often can be acetabular dysplasia in conjunction with the proximal femoral abnormalities. Slipped Capital Femoral Epiphysis (SCFE) patients have an alteration of the femoral neck and head alignment, which can make reshaping the femoral head difficult. In particular, the femoral head is rotated medially and posteriorly, reducing the anterior and lateral offset. We present a cohort of 20 patients, with history of a childhood hip disorder (SCFE or LCP), who underwent HRA to treat end-stage arthritis. Fifty percent had prior pediatric surgical intervention at an average age of 11. Method. After Institutional Review Board approval, data was reviewed retrospectively on patients with pediatric hip diseases of SCFE and LCP who underwent HRA using the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) by a single orthopaedic surgeon at a teaching institution. Harris Hip Scores (HHS), plain radiographs and blood metal ion levels were reviewed at routine intervals (12 months and annually thereafter). Those who had not returned for recent follow-up were contacted via telephone survey for a modified HHS. Results. Twenty patients had mean follow up of 2.8 years (range 1–7 years). Twelve had LCP and 8 SCFE. Median implant duration was 2.4 years. One-year metal ion testing revealed median chromium level of 2.3 ppb and median Cobalt level of 1.5 ppb. At one-year follow up, plain radiographs demonstrated all patient implants to be well-fixed, without radiolucent lines or osteolysis. Two patients at three and five-year follow-up exhibited heterotopic ossification. Mean HHS for LCP at 6 weeks post-operative was 88, and 98 at one year. Mean HHS for SCFE at 6 weeks post-operative was 77.5, and 98.6 at one year. LLD was significantly improved with an average pre-operative LLD of 12.6 mm and post op of 2.6 mm (p-value <0.001). At most recent follow-up, all retained their implants with overall average HHS of 98. Conclusion. At minimum of one-year following HRA, an increase in functional outcomes is found in patients who underwent HRA for osteoarthritis associated with LCP and SCFE with a mean HHS of 98. No increase was found in complications including femoral neck fracture or implant loosening despite technical challenges of the procedure related to proximal femoral morphologic abnormalities, or presence of acetabular dysplasia [Fig 1]

The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) has been used in the younger more active patient for the treatment of advanced osteoarthritis. Long-term follow-up of the BHR is limited. The Australian national joint replacement registry shows that failure rates vary greatly, depending on implant types. 77 consecutive BHR procedures with a minimum ten year follow-up are reported. There were 70 patients (44 males and 26 females) with an average operation age of 57.4 years (SD ±12.6). All patients were evaluated, including the “learning curve” patients. The mean follow-up period was 11.42 years (SD ±0.50). The arthroplasties were performed between April 1999 and December 2000 by one surgeon, with a standardised patient selection set of criteria. Data and outcome measurements were collected prospectively and analysed retrospectively. We evaluated Harris Hip Scores, Short Form-36 (SF-36v2) Scores, Tegner Activity Score Scores and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Scores (WOMAC) comparatively at preoperative, six month and yearly intervals. In 8 patients (10 procedures) the implant was in situ at the time of death. Revision was carried out in 6 hips (7.8%) at a mean time period of 2.5 years (0–10) post-operatively. Failure was due to femoral neck fracture in four patients, acetabular loosening in one and avascular necrosis of the femoral head, leading to loosening, in one patient. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed survivorship of 92.2% to 10 years. The mean Harris Hip scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 59.7 preoperatively to 80.1 at ten years. The mean SF-36v2 physical scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 35.09 preoperatively to 47.83 at ten years. WOMAC scores (paired t-test, p<0.05) improved significantly from 54.61 preoperatively to 85.89 at ten years. The BHR prosthesis, in this series, has been shown to be effective, reliable, and durable in this group of highly active, relatively young patients. Problems with metallic debris, sensitivity reactions, and osteolysis have not been seen. However, we believe that with better selection criteria, improved understanding of component positioning and surgical techniques, results can be improved

Purpose. There are some concerns about doing hip resurfacing arthroplasty in ONFH due to bone defect which can cause mechanical weakness of femoral component and highly active young age of patients which can cause high wear rate and failure rate. The purpose of this study is to verify the HRA is safe procedure in ONFH in the aspect of mechanical and biological issue. Materials and Methods. Between December 1998 and May 2005, 185 hips of 169 patients underwent MoM HRA using Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System® at single center. 166 hips (26 hips of female, 140 hips of male) of 144 patients have been reviewed for at least 7 years after MoM HRA. Mean follow-up period was 101.8 (84–178) months. Their mean age at the time of operation was 37.7(16–67) years old. Clinically, Harris hip scores (HHS), UCLA activity scores and range of motion were evaluated. Radiologically, the extent of necrotic area in preoperative MRI and radiolucency around implants, narrowing of retained neck, impingement, stress shielding, and heterotopic ossification were evaluated in the serial anteroposterior and groin lateral radiographs of hip. Complications were defined as joint dislocation, infection, implant loosening, femoral neck fracture and pseudotumor. Failure was defined as revision arthroplasty due to the complications. Results. The extent of necrotic area in preoperative MRI was average 37.6 (13.3–65)%. Clinically, average HHS was improved from 81.7 points to 98.5 points at last follow-up. Average UCLA activity score at last follow-up was 9.0 points. Range of motion at last follow-up was very satisfactory. There was no patient with severe pain around hip joint. Radiologically, radiolucency was shown around acetabular component in 2 cases (1.2%) and around stem of femoral components in 3 cases (1.8%). Fracture of femoral neck was seen in 1 case(0.6%). Moderate narrowing changes of retained femoral neck were noticed in 4 cases (2.4%). Impingement was seen in 12 cases (7.2%). We found only 1 case of osteolysis at Gruen zone III of acetabulum. Heterotopic ossification was found in 5 cases (3.0%). There was no case with hip dislocation, infection or pseudotumor. Revision surgeries after the primary resurfacing arthroplasty were performed in 4 cases (2.4%). Three hips were revised to the conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) because of loosening of acetabular component and femur neck fracture. One case of femoral component loosening was revised to THA using big metal head with retained acetabular component. Conclusions. MoM HRA in ONFH demonstrates good survivorship in average 101.8 months follow-up study. Most of patients show excellent clinical results with high level of activity postoperatively. Prevalence of complications is extremely lower than concern including the allergic reaction to the metal ion. There was no mechanical failure related to bone defect due to ONFH. This results suggests that MoM HRA in ONFH less than 50% of extent of necrosis can be justified