Hip resurfacing procedures have gained increasing popularity for younger, higher demand patients with degenerative hip pathologies. However, with concerns regarding revision rates and possible adverse metal hypersensitivity reactions with metal-on-metal articulations, some authors have questioned the hypothesised superiority of hip resurfacing over total hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes and complication rates of these two procedures. A systematic review was undertaken of all published and unpublished research up to January 2010. The primary search was of the databases Medline, CINAHL, AMED and EMBASE, searched via Ovid using MeSH terms and Boolian operators ‘hip’ AND ‘replacement’ OR ‘arthroplasty’ AND ‘resurfacing’. A secondary search of unpublished literature was conducted using the databases SIGLE, the National Technical Information Service, the National Research Register (UK), the British Library's Integrated Catalogue and Current Controlled Trials databases using the same search terms as the primary search. All included studies were critically appraised with the CASP appraisal tool. In total, 46 studies were identified from 1124 citations. These included 3799 hip resurfacings and 3282 total hip arthroplasties. On meta-analysis, functional outcomes for subjects following hip resurfacing were better than or the same as subjects with a total hip arthroplasty, with significantly higher WOMAC score (Mean Difference (MD)=−2.41; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): −3.88, −0.94; p=0.001), and significantly better Harris Hip Score (range of motion component) (MD=−0.05; 95% CI: (−0.07, −0.03; p<0.0001) and overall Harris Hip Score (MD=2.51; 95% CI: 1.24, 3.77; p=0.0001) in the hip resurfacing compared to total hip arthroplasty cohorts. However, there were significantly greater incidences of heterotopic ossification (Risk Ratio (RR)=1.62; 95% CI: 1.23, 2.14; p=0.006), aseptic loosening (RR=3.07; 95% CI:1.11, 8.50;p=0.03) and revision surgery (RR=1.72; 95% CI: 1.20, 2.45; p=0.003) with hip resurfacing compared to total hip arthroplasty. The evidence-base presented with a number of methodological inadequacies such as the limited use of power calculations and poor or absent blinding of both patients and assessors, potentially giving rise to assessor bias. In respect to these factors, the current evidence-base, whilst substantial in its size, may be questioned in respect to its quality in determining superiority of hip resurfacing over total hip arthroplasty

Total knee arthroplasty is a well established treatment for degenerative joint disease with good clinical results. However, complications may occur due to a biological response to polyethylene wear particles, leading to osteolysis and aseptic loosening, as well as local and systemic hypersensitivity reactions triggered by metal ions and particles such as chromium, cobalt and molybdenum. Moreover, there is an increasing demand on the performance of these implants, as this treatment is also performed in heavier, younger and middle-aged adults who have a significant physical activity and higher life expectancy. The purpose of the following study was to compare the wear characteristics and performance of a zirconium nitride (ZrN) coated knee implant, designed for patients with metal ion hypersensitivity, against the clinically established cobalt-chromium (CoCr) version under a high demanding activities wear simulation. Medium size AS Columbus® DD (Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) femoral and tibial components with a ZrN surface were tested in comparison with the cobalt-chromium version Columbus® DD. For both groups, ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) gliding surfaces (size T3, high 10 mm) were used. Wear simulation was performed on a load controlled 4 station knee wear simulator (EndoLab GmbH, Thansau, Germany) capable of reproducing loads and movement of daily activities measured in vivo (Bergmann et al, 2014) on 8 patients and normalized to a patient weight of 100 kg (Schwiesau et al, 2014). The load profiles were applied for 5 million cycles in a combination of 40% stairs up, 40% stairs down, 10% level walking, 8% chair raising and 2% deep squatting. Test serum was changed every 0.5 million cycles and all the components were cleaned and analyzed according to ISO 14243-2:2009(E). The gliding surfaces were evaluated for gravimetric wear and wear patterns, femur components analyzed for scratches and the test medium analyzed for metal ion concentration (cobalt, chromium, molybdenum and zirconium) using ICP-MS according to ISO 17294-2. The present study showed a wear rate reduction for the ZrN group (1.01 ± 0.29 mg/million) in comparison with the CoCr group (2.40 ± 1.18 mg/million cycles). The articulation surface of the ZrN coated femurs remained polished after the testing period, whereas the uncoated femurs showed wear scratches. Furthermore, the metal ion release from the ZrN coated implants was reduced orders of magnitude in comparison with the CoCr implants through the entire test. These results demonstrate the efficiency of ZrN coated knee implants to reduce wear as well as to prevent metal ion release in the knee joint