Are There Long-term Benefits to Cementing the Metaphyseal Stem in Hip Resurfacing?

The 20-year results of the first 400 Conserve Plus hip resurfacing arthroplasties

AIMS

Adverse local tissue reactions associated with abnormal wear considerably slowed down the general use of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), now limited to a few specialized centres. In this study, we provide the clinical results of 400 consecutive MoM HRAs implanted more than 20 years ago in one such centre.

METHODS

A total of 355 patients (400 hips) were treated with Conserve Plus HRA between November 1996 and November 2000. There were 96 female (27%) and 259 male patients (73%). Their mean age was 48.2 years (SD 10.9). The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) hip scores and 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) quality of life scores were reported. Survivorship was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 16.5 years (0.1 to 24.0), including 34 patients (37 hips) who died. The mean UCLA hip scores were 9.3 (2 to 10), 9.1 (3 to 10), 9.0 (3 to 10), and 6.9 (2 to 10) for pain, walking, function, and activity, respectively. The mean SF-12 scores were 48.4 (16.0 to 62.1) for the physical component and 48.5 (10.5 to 66.5) for the mental component, and did not differ from those of the general population of the USA. A total of 60 hips in 55 patients were revised. Using revision for any indication as the endpoint, the Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 83.5% at 20 years. A diagnosis of developmental dysplasia (hazard ratio (HR) 2.199 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.140 to 4.239); p = 0.019) and a low BMI (HR 0.931 (95% CI 0.873 to 0.994); p = 0.032) were risk factors for revision. Female sex was a risk factor only because of hip dysplasia and small component size. There were no cases of metal sensitivity associated with revision surgery. Radiological analysis showed persistent fixation in all but one hip.

CONCLUSION

The 83.5% 20-year survivorship of this initial series surpasses that of total hip arthroplasties in use 20 years ago in these young patients, suggesting satisfactory lifelong durability of the device for almost all of the remaining patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):25-32.

What are the results of revised hip resurfacing arthroplasties?

Aims

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is typically indicated for young and active patients. Due to the longevity of arthroplasty, these patients are likely to undergo revision surgery during their lifetime. There is a paucity of information on the long-term outcome of revision surgeries performed after failed HRA. The aim of our study was to provide survivorship data as well as clinical scores after HRA revisions.

Methods

A total of 42 patients (43 hips) were revised after HRA at our centre to a variety of devices, including four HRA and 39 total hip arthroplasties (THAs). In addition to perioperative complications, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) hip scores and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12) quality of life scores were collected at follow-up visits after the primary HRA and after revision surgery.

Results

The mean follow-up time after revision surgery was 8.3 years (0.3 to 19.1). The mean UCLA pain and function scores post-revision were comparable with the best scores achieved by the patients after the index HRA, but UCLA activity scores were lower after revision. SF-12 physical component scores were comparable between timepoints, but the mental component score decreased after revision. Six patients underwent unilateral re-revision surgery at a mean follow-up time of 7.8 years (0.3 to 13.7). Using the time to any re-revision as endpoint, the Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 85.3% at 13 years.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing revision after HRA can expect to achieve function and quality of life similar to their best after their primary surgery, while the risk of re-revision is low. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1289–1296.

Sex-specific risk factors determine the survivorship of female and male patients after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing

BACKGROUND

The need for revision surgery after hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is more prevalent for women than for men. However, there is a paucity of information to explain this observation. We aimed (1) to determine sex-specific risk factors leading to revision surgery; and (2) to correlate these risk factors to the dominant modes of failure of HRA.

METHODS

1101 patients (1375 consecutive hips) including 292 women (355 hips) and 809 men (1020 hips) with a mean age of 51.3 years were included regardless of bone quality. The contact patch to rim distance was computed.

RESULTS

A contact patch to rim (CPR) distance of ⩽7 mm, an aetiology of developmental dysplasia, a postoperative abduction-adduction arc of ⩾95°, and a metaphyseal stem left uncemented were risk factors associated with revision surgery for female patients, while a CPR distance of ⩽10 mm, a component size of ⩽46 mm, an age at surgery of ⩽55 years, and an early femoral preparation technique were risk factors for male patients. Hips with no risk factors from the female group had a survivorship of 98.7% at 15 years, matching or exceeding the results of all male subgroups. However the risk factors in the female group increased the risk of revision much more than in the male group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of risk factors, the survivorship of HRA in female patients is equal to that of males. Many female patients can safely benefit from HRA by excluding severe dysplasia and optimising surgical technique.

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) typically uses a hybrid design (cemented femoral component and cementless acetabular shell) but has recently been performed with fully cementless components. There is a paucity of information on the clinical performance of these cementless designs.

METHODS

The UCLA clinical scores, SF-12 quality of life scores, complication rates, survivorship and radiographic signs of loosening or gross stress shielding of 39 hips (39 male patients) implanted with cementless HRA were compared with those of 40 hips (37 male patients) implanted with hybrid HRA during the same time frame.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in postoperative clinical and quality of life scores, complication rates, or radiographic signs of loosening between the 2 groups. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 97.2% for the cementless group and 100% for the hybrid group. This difference was not significant (p = 0.3694). There were no femoral component failures in any of the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

At a mean follow-up of 6 years, there is no tangible difference between the performance of cementless HRA compared to hybrid HRA. The absence of learning curve associated with this device and the potential for better preservation of femoral neck bone mineral density suggest that this technology is well suited for young patients with good bone quality seeking to resume an active lifestyle including high-impact activities.

The mean ten-year results of metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Aims

This study presents the long-term survivorship, risk factors for prosthesis survival, and an assessment of the long-term effects of changes in surgical technique in a large series of patients treated by metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA).

Patients and Methods

Between November 1996 and January 2012, 1074 patients (1321 hips) underwent HRA using the Conserve Plus Hip Resurfacing System. There were 787 men (73%) and 287 women (27%) with a mean age of 51 years (14 to 83). The underlying pathology was osteoarthritis (OA) in 1003 (75.9%), developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in 136 (10.3%), avascular necrosis in 98 (7.4%), and other conditions, including inflammatory arthritis, in 84 (6.4%).

Results

The mean follow-up time was 10.5 years (1 to 20). Using revision for any reason as the endpoint, the overall survivorship at 15 years was 89.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 86.8 to 91.4). There was a substantial increase between the first and second generation of surgical technique (86.6% vs 90.1%; p = 0.05). Men with idiopathic OA had a 15-year survivorship of 94.5% and women, 82.2% (p = 0.001); gender was not a risk factor after stratification by component size and aetiology. Using revision for excessive wear (ion levels > 7 µg/l associated with symptoms or adverse local tissue reactions) as the endpoint, the 15-year survivorship was 98.5%. Risk factors for revision for all modes of failure were an underlying pathology of hip dysplasia, a contact patch to rim (CPR) distance of 7 mm or less, an age at surgery of 55 years or less, and a femoral component size of 46 mm or less. Specific risk factors for aseptic failure of the femoral component were early surgical technique, a cementless metaphyseal stem, and a body mass index of 24 kg/m2 or less.

Conclusion

HRA is a viable concept; metal-on-metal bearings are well suited for this procedure when a well-designed device is properly implanted. The best results were obtained in men with OA, but survivorship was better for other underlying pathologies and for women after changes were made to the technique of implantation. Lifetime durability is a possible outcome for many patients despite a high level of activity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1424–33.

Hip resurfacing for osteonecrosis

Aims

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is an alternative to conventional total hip arthroplasty for patients with osteonecrosis (ON) of the femoral head. Our aim was to report the long-term outcome of HRA, which is not currently known.

Patients and Methods

Long-term survivorship, clinical scores and radiographic results for 82 patients (99 hips) treated with HRA for ON over a period of 18 years were reviewed retrospectively. The mean age of the 67 men and 15 women at the time of surgery was 40.8 years (14 to 64). Patients were resurfaced regardless of the size of the osteonecrotic lesion.

Results

The mean clinical follow-up was 10.8 years (2 to 18). The mean University of California, Los Angeles hip scores at the last follow-up were 9.3, 9.4, 9.2 and 6.8 for pain, walking, function and activity, respectively. A total of six hips underwent revision surgery, four for loosening of the femoral component and two for loosening of the acetabular component. Using any revision as an end point, the 15-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 90.3%. There were no wear-related failures. There were no femoral failures among the hips reconstructed with a cemented metaphyseal stem. A total of five hips showed narrowing of the femoral neck; all stabilised and remain asymptomatic, 21 showed signs of femoral neck impingement.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first report of a series of HRA performed for ON with 15-year survivorship. Our data confirm that patients with advanced stages of ON of the femoral head are excellent candidates for HRA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:901–9.