Hip Resurfacing vs Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Younger than 35 Years: A Comparison of Revision Rates and Patient-Reported Outcomes

The Choice of Hip Arthroplasty: HRA or THA? Revealed by Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the gold standard for end-stage hip arthrosis, while hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is considered a more bone-conserving alternative. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and clinical efficacy of HRA and THA.

METHODS

The databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CNKI were searched for RCTs comparing HRA and THA in treating hip arthrosis from database initiation to April 2024. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined, and data extraction, quality evaluation, and risk bias assessment were performed. A meta-analysis was conducted using appropriate RevManv5.4 and Stata v14.0 software.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs from six countries were included. HRA had a similar revision rate, function scores (WOMAC, HSS, OHS, UCLA activity score, EQ-D, EQ-5D VAS), and blood levels of cobalt and chromium compared to THA. HRA had fewer complications and less blood loss but required more operating time.

CONCLUSIONS

HRA is a safe and effective alternative to THA, with similar revision and functional outcomes, less blood loss, and is particularly suitable for young male patients with a demand for high-level activities.

Older Patients May Fare Better Following Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Since its inception, activity level and bone quality have been essential considerations for patients undergoing hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). Moreover, younger patients tend to experience fewer complications, lower revision rates, and better outcomes after any surgery. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes, complication rates, and survivorship rates between younger and older patients undergoing HRA, providing insights into whether active older patients with appropriate bone quality can still achieve significant benefits from HRA.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Articles were screened by title and abstract, followed by full-text review. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model to compare UCLA scores and odds of prosthesis survivorship between younger (<50 years of age) and older (>50 years of age) patients in studies comparing both age groups. Statistical significance was defined as a 95% confidence interval that does not include 1. In addition, the average complication and prosthesis survivorship rates were calculated and compared between younger and older hips using both comparative and noncomparative studies.

RESULTS

From an initial pool of 1,286 articles, 31 met inclusion criteria, encompassing 22,691 patients. Analysis revealed a pooled mean age of 33.65 years for the younger cohort and 63 years for the older cohort, and a complication rate of 5.37% in younger compared with 3.83% in older hips. The difference in postoperative UCLA scores was deemed statistically insignificant based on meta-analysis. However, the difference in mean survivorship rates was found to be statistically significant at 86% for younger and 94.9% for older patients through univariate analysis and meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

There is no significant difference in postoperative outcomes between younger and older patients undergoing HRA. In fact, older patients seem to experience higher prosthesis survivorship rates compared with younger cohorts. Older patients who are active and possess good bone quality can achieve outcomes comparable to their younger counterparts, indicating that HRA may be viable for a broader age range than previously considered.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Correction of Acquired Leg Length Discrepancy after Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty by Revision Resurfacing: A Case Report

CASE

A 53-year-old man presented with a 13-mm leg length discrepancy following left hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), resulting in pain and imbalance. Advanced osteoarthritis of the contralateral hip was also noted. The patient strongly preferred HRA over total hip arthroplasty. Adequate remaining bone stock and the ability to resurface the contralateral hip allowed for resolution with 2 HRAs.

CONCLUSION

This is the first known revision of a HRA with a subsequent HRA. Assuming sufficient bone stock and precise implant positioning, resurfacing presents a feasible methodology to overcome complex anatomical deformities and improve mobility.

Contemporary Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients ≤50 Years of Age: Results of >500 Cases

BACKGROUND

There has been a paucity of long-term outcomes data on aseptic revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in the young adult population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate implant survivorship, complications, and clinical outcomes in a large cohort of contemporary aseptic revision THAs in patients ≤50 years of age at the time of the surgical procedure.

METHODS

We identified 545 aseptic revision THAs performed at a single academic institution from 2000 to 2020 in patients who were 18 to 50 years of age. Patients who underwent conversion THAs and patients with a history of any ipsilateral hip infection were excluded. The mean age was 43 years, the mean body mass index (BMI) was 29 kg/m 2 , and 63% were female. The index indication for revision THA was aseptic loosening in 46% of cases, polyethylene wear or osteolysis in 28% of cases (all revisions of conventional polyethylene), and dislocation in 11% of cases. There were 126 hips (23%) that had undergone at least 1 previous revision (median, 1 revision [range, 1 to 5 revisions]). The mean follow-up was 10 years.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, the 20-year survivorship free of any re-revision was 76% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 69% to 82%). There were 87 re-revisions, with 31 dislocations, 18 cases of aseptic loosening of the femoral component, and 16 periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) being the most common reasons for re-revision. Dislocation as the indication for the index revision was associated with an increased risk of re-revision (hazard ratio, 2.9; p < 0.001). The 20-year survivorship free of any reoperation was 73% (95% CI, 66% to 78%). There were 75 nonoperative complications (14%), including 32 dislocations. The mean Harris hip score significantly improved (p < 0.001) from 65 preoperatively to 81 at 10 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary aseptic revision THAs in patients ≤50 years of age demonstrated a re-revision risk of approximately 1 in 4 at 20 years. Dislocation, aseptic loosening of the femoral component, and PJI were the most common reasons for re-revision. Index revision THAs for dislocation had a 3 times higher risk of re-revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluation of an early-stage prototype polyurethane femoral head implant for hip arthroplasty

Introduction

Thi study evalautes a new bone-preserving femoral head cover that mimics the articular cartilage of the femoral head.

Methods

A specially developed polyurethane (PU) was evaluated in biocompatibility (cytotoxicity test) and mechanical response to tensile loading. In the cytotoxicity test, steam sterilized (SS) and ethylene oxide sterilized (EtO) PU samples were incubated separately in a cell culture medium. The seeded cell line MG-63 was then added to these sample-incubated cell culture mediums. One negative control group and one positive control group were also evaluated. The cells in each group were cultured for seven days before being quantified using the alamarBlue assay. In the mechanical test, the femoral head cover implants were separated into three groups of three samples. Each group represented a different implant insertion idea: direct insertion (uc sample) and another two insertion modes (is and ss samples) representing implants with enclosure mechanisms. The test consisted of distance-controlled cyclic tensile loadings followed by a failure test.

Results

The cytotoxicity test results show no significant difference in fluorescence intensity between the negative control, the three SS groups, and one EtO group (P > 0.05). However, the other two EtO groups exhibit significantly lower fluorescence intensity compared with the negative control (P < 0.05). In the mechanical test, the is samples have the highest cyclic loading force at 559.50 ± 51.41 N, while the uc samples exhibit the highest force in the failure test at 632.16 ± 50.55 N. There are no significant differences (P > 0.05) among the uc, is, and ss groups in terms of stiffness.

Conclusion

The cytotoxicity test and the mechanical experiment provide initial assessments of the proposed PU femoral head cover implant. The evaluation outcomes of this study could serve as a foundation for developing more functional design and testing methods, utilizing numerical simulations, and developing animal/clinical trials in the future.

Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: Past, Present and Future

The history of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has faced numerous challenges and undergone decades of evolution in materials and methods. These innovations have been translated to the successes of current prostheses and represent a surgical and mechanical achievement. Modern HRAs now have long term outcomes with excellent results in specific patient groups as demonstrated in national joint registries. This article reviews the key moments in the history of HRAs with specific emphasis on the lessons learnt, current outcomes and future prospects.

The 50 Most-Cited Articles Regarding Hip Resurfacing

Background

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is an accepted treatment option for young patients presenting with osteoarthritis of the hip. The purpose of this review was to evaluate and identify the top 50 most-cited articles pertaining to hip resurfacing, to help clinicians identify influential articles and navigate the literature more effectively.

Material and methods

Clarivate Analytics Web of Science was used to identify all articles related to hip resurfacing. The screening was based on the number of citations for each article. The final list of articles was further reviewed, and further data including manuscript title, authors, total citation count, year of publication, journal, country of origin, and level of evidence were extracted.

Results

The most-cited publication was “Pseudotumors associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings”, which was cited 704 times. The average total number of citations per publication was 203. The most prolific publication year was 2008 with 8 publications, and the most recent article was published in 2012. The journals with the most attributable publications were Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and Clinical and Orthopedic Related Research.

Conclusions

This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the most-cited articles pertaining to hip resurfacing.

Level of evidence

III.