R. B. C. Treacy

Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty: A MINIMUM FOLLOW-UP OF FIVE YEARS

We report the survival at five years of 144 consecutive metal-on-metal resurfacings of the hip implanted between August 1997 and May 1998. Failure was defined as revision of either the acetabular or femoral component for any reason during the study period. The survival at the end of five years was 98% overall and 99% for aseptic revisions only. The mean age of the patients at implantation was 52.1 years. Three femoral components failed during the first two years, two were infected and one fractured. A single stage revision was carried out in each case. No other revisions were performed or are impending. No patients were lost to follow-up. Four died from unrelated causes during the study period. This study confirms that hip resurfacing using a metal-on-metal bearing of known provenance can provide a solution in the medium term for the younger more active adult who requires surgical intervention for hip disease.

Metal on Metal Surface Replacement of the Hip: Experience of the McMinn Prosthesis

The historical failure of surface replacement has been due to the production of wear debris with subsequent bone resorption, loosening, and failure. To avoid these problems, a surface replacement using a metal on metal bearing allowing thin components and femoral design and instrumentation to avoid varus alignment has been designed. Two hundred thirty-five joints have been resurfaced with this prosthesis in almost 5 years. There have been no femoral neck fractures and no dislocations. There have been 4 designs differing in the method of fixation. In the press fit group, 6 of 70 hips had to be revised for aseptic loosening. In the cemented group, debonding of the cup occurred in 3 of 43 cases. Six patients had hydroxyapatite coated components and have had excellent clinical outcomes. The current design uses a peripherally expanded hydroxyapatite coated cup and a cemented metal head; 116 of this design have been implanted during a 19-month period with excellent outcome. Despite short followup the authors are hopeful that the combination of a polar metal on metal bearing with appropriate fixation will yield a method of preserving bone stock in the younger patient requiring arthroplasty.

Birmingham hip resurfacing: A MINIMUM FOLLOW-UP OF TEN YEARS

We report the survival, radiological and functional outcomes of a single surgeon series of his first 144 consecutive Birmingham hip resurfacing procedures (130 patients) at a minimum of ten years. There were ten revisions during this time. Although no patients were lost to follow-up some did not complete the scoring assessment or undergo radiological assessment at ten years. The ten-year survival for male patients was 98.0% (95% confidence interval 95.2 to 100). The ten-year survival for the total cohort with aseptic revision as the endpoint was 95.5% (95% confidence interval 91.8 to 99.0) and including revisions for sepsis was 93.5% (95% confidence interval 89.2 to 97.6). The median modified Oxford hip score at ten years was 4.2% (interquartile range 0 to 19) and the median University of California, Los Angeles score was 7.0 (interquartile range 5.0 to 8.0). This study confirms the midterm reports that metal-on-metal hip resurfacing using the Birmingham Hip provides a durable alternative to total hip replacement, particularly in younger male patients wishing to maintain a high level of function, with low risk of revision for at least ten years.

The Influence of Head Size and Sex on the Outcome of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing

BACKGROUND Hip resurfacing has gained popularity for the treatment of young and active patients who have arthritis. Recent literature has demonstrated an increased rate of revision among female patients as compared with male patients who have undergone hip resurfacing. The aim of the present study was to identify any differences in survival or functional outcome between male and female patients with osteoarthritis who were managed with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. METHODS A prospective collection of data on all patients undergoing Birmingham Hip Resurfacing at a single institution was commenced in July 1997. On the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 1826 patients (2123 hips, including 799 hips in female patients and 1324 hips in male patients) with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis who had undergone the procedure between July 1997 and December 2008 were identified. The variables of age, sex, preoperative Oxford Hip Score, component size used, surgical approach, lead surgeon, and surgeon experience were analyzed. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard survival model was used to identify which variables were most influential for determining revision. RESULTS The mean duration of follow-up was 3.46 years (range, 0.03 to 10.9 years). The five-year cumulative survival rate for the 655 hips that were followed for a minimum of five years was 97.5% (95% confidence interval, 96.3% to 98.3%). There were forty-eight revisions. Revision was significantly associated with female sex (hazard rate, 2.03 [95% confidence interval, 1.15 to 3.58]; p = 0.014) and decreasing femoral component size (hazard rate per 4-mm decrease in size, 4.68 [95% confidence interval, 4.36 to 5.05]; p < 0.001). Revision was not associated with age (p = 0.88), surgeon (p = 0.41), surgeon experience (p = 0.30), or surgical approach (p = 0.21). A multivariate analysis including the covariates of sex, age, surgeon, surgeon experience, surgical approach, and femoral component size demonstrated that sex was no longer significantly associated with revision when femoral component size was included in the model (p = 0.37). Femoral component size alone was the best predictor of revision when all covariates were analyzed (hazard rate per 4-mm decrease in size, 4.87 [95% confidence interval, 4.37 to 5.42]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The present study demonstrates that although female patients initially may appear to have a greater risk of revision, this increased risk is related to differences in the femoral component size and thus is only indirectly related to sex. Patient selection for hip resurfacing is best made on the basis of femoral head size rather than sex.

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in osteonecrosis of the femoral head.

BACKGROUND The treatment of end-stage osteonecrosis of the femoral head remains a challenge to the orthopaedic surgeon. Historically, total hip arthroplasty for this condition has been associated with poor rates of survival and function when compared with total hip arthroplasty for the treatment of osteoarthritis. The purpose of this study was to determine the medium-term clinical and radiographic results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty in patients with end-stage osteonecrosis of the femoral head. METHODS From June 1994 to March 2004, a consecutive single-surgeon series of seventy-three hip resurfacing procedures were performed in sixty patients for the treatment of end-stage osteonecrosis of the femoral head. The cohort included forty-two men (ten of whom had a bilateral resurfacing) and eighteen women (three of whom had a bilateral resurfacing). The mean age was forty-three years (range, seventeen to sixty-nine years). A clinical and radiographic review was performed. RESULTS There were four revision operations and one planned revision of the seventy-three hips during the follow-up period. Two of these revisions were necessitated by aseptic failure of the femoral component. This represents an overall survival rate of 93.2% at a mean of 6.1 years of follow-up (range, two to twelve years). CONCLUSIONS On the basis of this study, metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip for osteonecrosis can be considered a safe and effective form of surgery for this group of patients. Longer-term follow-up is required to confirm the expected continued success of this form of arthroplasty in this difficult-to-treat population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors on jbjs.org for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing in patients aged < 50 years up to 14 years post-operatively

We report the long-term survival and functional outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in patients aged < 50 years at operation, and explore the factors affecting survival. Between 1997 and 2006, a total of 447 BHRs were implanted in 393 patients (mean age 41.5 years (14.9 to 49.9)) by one designing surgeon. The mean follow-up was 10.1 years (5.2 to 14.7), with no loss to follow-up. In all, 16 hips (3.6%) in 15 patients were revised, giving an overall cumulative survival of 96.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 93.7 to 98.3) at ten years and 94.1% (95% CI 84.9 to 97.3) at 14 years. Using aseptic revision as the endpoint, the survival for men with primary osteoarthritis (n = 195) was 100% (95% CI 100 to 100) at both ten years and 14 years, and in women with primary osteoarthritis (n = 109) it was 96.1% (95% CI 90.1 to 99.9) at ten years and 91.2% (95% CI 68.6 to 98.7) at 14 years. Female gender (p = 0.047) and decreasing femoral head size (p = 0.044) were significantly associated with an increased risk of revision. The median Oxford hip score (OHS, modified as a percentage with 100% indicating worst outcome) at last follow-up was 4.2% (46 of 48; interquartile range (IQR) 0% to 24%) and the median University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score was 6.0 (IQR 5 to 8). Men had significantly better OHS (p = 0.02) and UCLA scores (p = 0.01) than women. The BHR provides excellent survival and functional results in men into the second decade, with good results achieved in appropriately selected women.

ONE- OR TWO-STAGE BILATERAL METAL-ON-METAL HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY

Patients considered suitable for total hip resurfacing arthroplasty often have bilateral disease. The peri-operative complications, transfusion requirements, hospital stay, outcome and costs in patients undergoing one-stage bilateral total hip resurfacing were compared with a group of patients undergoing a two-stage procedure. A total of 92 patients were included in the study, of which 37 (40%) had a one-stage and 55 (60%) had a two-stage resurfacing. There were no significant differences in age, gender, or American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade between the groups (p = 0.31, p = 0.23, p = 0.13, respectively). There were three systemic complications in the one-stage group (8.1%) and one in the two-stage group (1.8% of patients; 0.9% of procedures). There was no significant difference in the complication rate (p = 0.72) or the transfusion requirements (p = 0.32) between the two groups. The one-stage group had a reduced total hospital stay of five days (95% confidence interval 4.0 to 6.9; p < 0.001), reduced length of time to completion of all surgery of five months (95% confidence interval 2.6 to 8.3; p < 0.001), and the reduced cost was 35% less than that of a two-stage procedure. However, the total anaesthetic time was significantly longer for the one-stage group (p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval 31 to 52). This study demonstrates that consideration should be given to one-stage surgery for patients with bilateral symptomatic disease suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. A one-stage procedure appears to have benefits for both the patient and the hospital without additional complications.

The Effectiveness of Blood Metal Ions in Identifying Patients with Unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing and Corail-Pinnacle Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants at Risk of Adverse Reactions to Metal Debris.

BACKGROUND We investigated whether blood metal ions could effectively identify patients with metal-on-metal hip implants with two common designs (Birmingham Hip Resurfacing [BHR] and Corail-Pinnacle) who were at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris. METHODS This single-center, prospective study involved 598 patients with unilateral hip implants (309 patients with the BHR implant and 289 patients with the Corail-Pinnacle implant) undergoing whole blood metal ion sampling at a mean time of 6.9 years. Patients were classified into two groups, one that had adverse reactions to metal debris (those who had to undergo revision for adverse reactions to metal debris or those with adverse reactions to metal debris on imaging; n = 46) and one that did not (n = 552). Three metal ion parameters (cobalt, chromium, and cobalt-chromium ratio) were compared between groups. Optimal metal ion thresholds for identifying patients with adverse reactions to metal debris were determined using receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS All ion parameters were significantly higher (p < 0.0001) in the patients who had adverse reactions to metal debris compared with those who did not. Cobalt maximized the area under the curve for patients with the BHR implant (90.5%) and those with the Corail-Pinnacle implant (79.6%). For patients with the BHR implant, the area under the curve for cobalt was significantly greater than that for the cobalt-chromium ratio (p = 0.0005), but it was not significantly greater than that for chromium (p = 0.8483). For the patients with the Corail-Pinnacle implant, the area under the curve for cobalt was significantly greater than that for chromium (p = 0.0004), but it was similar to that for the cobalt-chromium ratio (p = 0.8139). Optimal blood metal ion thresholds for identifying adverse reactions to metal debris varied between the two different implants. When using cobalt, the optimal threshold for identifying adverse reactions to metal debris was 2.15 μg/L for the BHR group and 3.57 μg/L for the Corail-Pinnacle group. These thresholds had good sensitivities (88.5% for the BHR group and 80.0% for the Corail-Pinnacle group) and specificities (84.5% for the BHR group and 76.2% for the Corail-Pinnacle group), high negative predictive values (98.8% for the BHR group and 98.1% for the Corail-Pinnacle group), and low positive predictive values (34.3% for the BHR group and 20.0% for the Corail-Pinnacle group). The authority thresholds proposed by the United States (3 μg/L and 10 μg/L) and the United Kingdom (7 μg/L) missed more patients with adverse reactions to metal debris at 2.0% to 4.7% (twelve to twenty-eight patients) compared with our implant-specific thresholds at 1.2% (seven patients missed). CONCLUSIONS Patients who underwent metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty performed with unilateral BHR or Corail-Pinnacle implants and who had blood metal ions below our implant-specific thresholds were at low risk of adverse reactions to metal debris. These thresholds could be used to rationalize follow-up resources in asymptomatic patients. Analysis of cobalt alone is acceptable. Implant-specific thresholds were more effective than currently recommended fixed authority thresholds for identifying patients at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris requiring further investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Predicting high blood metal ion concentrations following hip resurfacing.

Purpose To determine whether gender, femoral head size, acetabular inclination, and time since surgery predicted high blood metal ion concentrations following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR). Methods BHR patients with unilateral bearings at one specialist centre with blood cobalt and chromium concentrations measured up to May 2013 were included. This comprised a mixed (at-risk) group including symptomatic patients and asymptomatic individuals with specific clinical and/or radiological findings. Blood sampling was at a mean of 7.5 years (range 1-15.4 years) postoperatively. Results Of 319 patients (mean age 49.3 years; 53% male), blood metal ions greater than 7 µg/l were observed in 9% (n = 28). Blood metal ions were significantly higher in females (p<0.001), femoral head sizes ≤48 mm (p<0.01), and cup inclinations >55° (p<0.001). Linear regression demonstrated femoral head size was responsible for the highest proportion of variance in blood metal ions (cobalt p<0.001, R2 = 8%; chromium p<0.001, R2 = 11%). Analysis of femoral head size and inclination together demonstrated 36% of BHRs with head sizes of 38-44 mm and inclination >55° had blood metal ions >7 µg/l. BHR 10-year survival for this at-risk group was 91% (95% confidence intervals 86.0%-95.0%) with 30 hips revised. Conclusions If blood metal ions are used to screen hip resurfacing patients for adverse reactions to metal debris it is recommended those with small femoral head sizes (38-44 mm) and high acetabular inclinations (>55°) are targeted. These findings require validation in other cohorts as they may not be applicable to all hip resurfacing devices given the differences in radial clearance, coverage arc, and metallurgy.

A review of hip resurfacings revised for unexplained pain

Background Adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) has come to prominence as a mode of failure for metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. These patients frequently present with unexplained groin pain. Aims 1) To review all metal-on-metal hip resurfacings revised for unexplained pain seeking evidence for ARMD; 2) To determine the clinical outcome following revision arthroplasty. Methods The hospital database was searched (1997–2009) to identify all cases of Birmingham Hip Resurfacings (BHRs) revised for unexplained pain. ARMD was diagnosed using specific clinical, radiological, and histopathological criteria. Postoperatively all patients were assessed in clinic and completed an Oxford Hip Score (OHS) questionnaire. Results Of 3076 BHRs implanted 149 were revised. Of these, 20 BHRs in 17 patients were revised for unexplained pain (mean age at BHR 50.5 yr; 55% female). Unexplained pain requiring revision had a prevalence of 0.65% of all hip resurfacings performed (20/3076). ARMD was the mode of failure in 50% (n = 10). Common features observed in ARMD patients included hip-joint effusions, femoral neck thinning, intraoperative macroscopic granulomas, and lymphocytic infiltrates on histopathological examination. No ARMD patients had macroscopic soft-tissue destruction. A range of mechanical causes were responsible for the remaining failures. At a mean 3.6 year follow-up (range 1.1–8.0) one ARMD patient experienced a dislocation. There were no further complications or need for surgical reintervention. Median OHS for the cohort was 25.0%. Conclusions Hip resurfacings revised for unexplained pain comprise a diverse group of conditions with ARMD being the commonest. ARMD probably contains subgroups yet to be defined, some of which may be related to mechanical rather than immunological factors.