The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2008;90:637-654.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.01012
© 2008 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty
Andrew Shimmin, MBBS, FAOrthA1,
Paul E. Beaulé, MD, FRCSC2 and
Pat Campbell, PhD3
1 Melbourne Orthopaedic Group, 33 The Avenue, Windsor, Victoria 3181, Australia. E-mail address: ashimmin{at}optusnet.com.au
2 Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Adult Reconstruction Service, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON K1H HL6, Canada. E-mail address: pbeaule{at}Ottawahospital.on.ca
3 Implant Retrieval Laboratory, Orthopaedic Hospital, University of California at Los Angeles, 2400 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, CA 90007. E-mail address: pcampbell{at}laoh.ucla.edu
Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. One or more of the authors or a member of his or her immediate family received, in any one year, payments or other benefits in excess of $10,000 or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (Wright Medical Technology). Also, commercial entities (Wright Medical Technology, DePuy, and Zimmer) paid or directed in any one year, or agreed to pay or direct, benefits in excess of $10,000 to a research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which one or more of the authors, or a member of his or her immediate family, is affiliated or associated.
The main advantage of hip resurfacing is bone conservation for patients likely to outlive a primary conventional hip replacement.
Previous attempts at hip resurfacing failed predominantly because of the consequences of a high amount of wear of thin polyethylene acetabular components and poor femoral component fixation.
With correct patient selection, surgeon education, and operative technique, survivorship at five years is comparable with that of traditional hip replacements.
Hip resurfacing has its own unique set of complications, including a fractured neck of the femur. It is necessary to understand the risk factors prior to performing the procedure.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Facebook Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. M. Seyler, D. R. Marker, H. S. Boyd, M. G. Zywiel, M. S. McGrath, and M. A. Mont
Preoperative Evaluation to Determine Candidates for Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
November 1, 2009;
91(Supplement_6):
32 - 41.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. P. Vail, M. A. Mont, M. S. McGrath, M. G. Zywiel, P. E. Beaule, and W. N. Capello
Hip Resurfacing: Patient and Treatment Options
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
August 1, 2009;
91(Supplement_5):
2 - 4.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. A. Maher, C. Hidaka, M. E. Cunningham, and S. A. Rodeo
What's New in Orthopaedic Research
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
August 1, 2008;
90(8):
1800 - 1808.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. A. Mont and T. P. Schmalzried
Modern Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing: Important Observations from the First Ten Years
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.,
August 1, 2008;
90(Supplement_3):
3 - 11.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|