Resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip is being performed more frequently in the United Kingdom. The majority of these patients are younger than 55 years of age, and in this group the key benefits include conservation of femoral bone stock and the potential reduction in the rate of dislocation afforded by the larger resurfacing head. Early aseptic loosening is well recognised in patients younger than 55 years of age, and proponents of resurfacing believe that the improved wear characteristics of the metal-on-metal bearing may improve the long-term survival of this implant. There has been some concern, however, that resurfacing may not be conservative of acetabular bone.

We compared a series of 33 consecutive patients who had a hybrid total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented acetabular component and a cemented femoral implant, with 35 patients undergoing a Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. We compared the diameter of the implanted acetabulum in both groups and, because they were not directly comparable, we corrected for patient size by measuring the diameter of the contralateral femoral head. The data were analysed using unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance.

There was a significantly larger acetabulum in the Birmingham arthroplasty group (mean diameter 56.6 mm vs 52.0 mm; p < 0.001). However, this group had a significantly larger femoral head diameter on the contralateral side (p = 0.03). Analysis of covariance revealed a significant difference between the mean size of the acetabular component implanted in the two operations. The greatest difference in the size of acetabulum was in those patients with a larger diameter of the femoral head. This study shows that more bone is removed from the acetabulum in hip resurfacing than during hybrid total hip arthroplasty, a difference which is most marked in larger patients.

Hip resurfacing is being performed more frequently in the United Kingdom. The possible benefits include more accurate restoration of leg length, femoral offset and femoral anteversion than occurs after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

We compared anteroposterior radiographs from 26 patients who had undergone hybrid THA (uncemented cup/cemented stem), with 28 who had undergone Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty (BHR). We measured the femoral offset, femoral length, acetabular offset and acetabular height with reference to the normal contralateral hip. The data were analysed by paired t-tests.

There was a significant reduction in femoral offset (p = 0.0004) and increase in length (p = 0.001) in the BHR group. In the THA group, there was a significant reduction in acetabular offset (p = 0.0003), but femoral offset and overall hip length were restored accurately. We conclude that hip resurfacing does not restore hip mechanics as accurately as THA.

The radiological features of the cement mantle around total hip replacements (THRs) have been used to assess aseptic loosening. In this case-control study we investigated the risk of failure of THR as predictable by a range of such features using data from patients recruited to the Trent Regional Arthroplasty Study (TRAS).

An independent radiological assessment was undertaken on Charnley THRs with aseptic loosening within five years of surgery and on a control group from the TRAS database. Chi-squared tests were used to test the probability of obtaining the observed data by chance, and odds ratios were calculated to estimate the strength of association for different features.

Several features were associated with a clinically important increase (> twofold) in the risk of loosening, which was statistically significant for four features (p < 0.01). Inadequate cementation (Barrack C and D grades) was the most significant feature, with an estimated odds ratio of 9.5 (95% confidence interval 3.2 to 28.4, p < 0.0001) for failure.

Three radiological methods are commonly used to assess the outcome of total hip replacement (THR). They aim to record the appearance of lucent areas and migration of the prosthesis in a reproducible manner. Two of them were designed to monitor the implant through time and one to grade the quality of cementing. We have measured the level of inter- and intraobserver agreement in all three systems.

We randomised 30 patients to receive either finger packing or retrograde gun cementing during Charnley hip replacements. The postoperative departmental radiographs were evaluated in a blinded study by two orthopaedic trainees, two consultants and two experts in THR. The trainees and consultants repeated the exercise at least two weeks later. We used the unweighted kappa statistic to establish the levels of agreement.

In general, intraobserver agreement was moderate but interobserver agreement was poor, with levels similar to or less than those expected by chance. Our results indicate that such systems cannot provide reliable data from centres in different parts of the world, with various levels of surgeon evaluating radiographs at differing time intervals. We discuss the problem and suggest some methods of improvement.