A total of 219 hips in 192 patients aged between
18 and 65 years were randomised to 28-mm metal-on-metal uncemented
total hip replacements (THRs, 107 hips) or hybrid hip resurfacing
(HR, 112 hips). At a mean follow-up of eight years (6.6 to 9.3)
there was no significant difference between the THR and HR groups
regarding rate of revision (4.0% (4 of 99) Cite this article:
We evaluated the concentrations of chromium and cobalt ions in blood after metal-on-metal surface replacement arthroplasty using a wrought-forged, high carbon content chromium-cobalt alloy implant in 64 patients. At one year, mean whole blood ion levels were 1.61 μg/L (0.4 to 5.5) for chromium and 0.67 μg/L (0.23 to 2.09) for cobalt. The pre-operative ion levels, component size, female gender and the inclination of the acetabular component were inversely proportional to the values of chromium and/or cobalt ions at one year postoperatively. Other factors, such as age and level of activity, did not correlate with the levels of metal ions. We found that the levels of the ions in the serum were 1.39 and 1.37 times higher for chromium and cobalt respectively than those in the whole blood. The levels of metal ions obtained may be specific to the hip resurfacing implant and reflect its manufacturing process.
We have undertaken a prospective, randomised study to compare conservation of acetabular bone after total hip replacement and resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. We randomly assigned 210 hips to one of the two treatment groups. Uncemented, press-fit acetabular components were used for both. No significant difference was found in the mean diameter of acetabular implant inserted in the groups (54.74 mm for total hip replacement and 54.90 mm for resurfacing arthroplasty). In seven resurfacing procedures (6.8%), the surgeon used a larger size of component in order to match the corresponding diameter of the femoral component. With resurfacing arthroplasty, conservation of bone is clearly advantageous on the femoral side. Our study has shown that, with a specific design of acetabular implant and by following a careful surgical technique, removal of bone on the acetabular side is comparable with that of total hip replacement.
We have compared the biomechanical nature of the reconstruction of the hip in conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) and surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) in a randomised study involving 120 patients undergoing unilateral primary hip replacement. The contralateral hip was used as a control. Post-operatively, the femoral offset was significantly increased with THA (mean 5.1 mm; −2.8 to 11.6) and decreased with SRA (mean −3.3 mm; −8.9 to 8.2). Femoral offset was restored within Restoration of the normal proximal femoral anatomy was more precise with SRA. The enhanced stability afforded by the use of a large-diameter femoral head avoided over-lengthening of the limb or increased offset to improve soft-tissue tension as occurs sometimes in THA. In a subgroup of patients with significant pre-operative deformity, restoration of the normal hip anatomy with lower pre-operative femoral offset or significant shortening of the leg was still possible with SRA.