Hip replacement is a very successful operation and the outcome is usually excellent. There are recognised complications that seem increasingly to give rise to litigation. This paper briefly examines some common scenarios where litigation may be pursued against hip surgeons. With appropriate record keeping, consenting and surgical care, the claim can be successfully defended if not avoided. We hope this short summary will help to highlight some common pitfalls. There is extensive literature available for detailed study

Metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing was developed in the 1990s by surgeons in Birmingham, UK, as a surgical solution to the problem of osteoarthritis in younger, more active patients. Early results were promising and the procedure gained in popularity. However, adverse reports of soft-tissue reaction and failure started to appear from 2008 onwards. Surgeons may be asked to write medico-legal reports on the surgical aspects of an individual case for claimant lawyers or in defence for the NHSLA or indemnity insurers. The purpose of this article is to cover some of the aspects of the operation that may be considered in such medico-legal reports.