Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: what have we learned?
- PMID: 17472303
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: what have we learned?
Abstract
Surface hip arthroplasty has many attractive features for young, active patients, particularly because of the conservative nature of this treatment and its ability to preserve femoral bone. It is more anatomic and physiologic than stem-type hip replacements, and it represents a truly minimally osteoinvasive procedure, with no penetration into the femoral intramedullary canal. In addition, the construct has increased stability because of the near-normal diameter of the femoral component compared with most conventional hip replacement components. Although the short- to midterm clinical results for metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing implants are definitely superior to those of earlier generations of resurfacing implants, the results of conventional total hip replacement using contemporary designs and bearing materials have also improved. As a result, it is imperative to assess what is known about the safety and efficacy of resurfacing to refine the indications and technique to improve the overall results and durability.
Similar articles
-
Metal-on-metal surface replacement: a triumph of hope over reason: affirms.Orthopedics. 2011 Sep 9;34(9):e439-41. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20110714-21. Orthopedics. 2011. PMID: 21902124 Review.
-
Complications after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty.Orthop Clin North Am. 2011 Apr;42(2):207-30, viii. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2010.12.002. Orthop Clin North Am. 2011. PMID: 21435496 Review.
-
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: a skeptic's view.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Dec;465:86-91. doi: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e3181468911. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007. PMID: 17632416 Review.
-
Current concepts of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.Orthop Clin North Am. 2005 Apr;36(2):143-62, viii. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.007. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005. PMID: 15833452 Review.
-
Less range of motion with resurfacing arthroplasty than with total hip arthroplasty: in vitro examination of 8 designs.Acta Orthop. 2008 Dec;79(6):755-62. doi: 10.1080/17453670810016812. Acta Orthop. 2008. PMID: 19085491
Cited by
-
[Approach to painful hip resurfacing].Orthopade. 2011 Jun;40(6):481-90. doi: 10.1007/s00132-011-1757-y. Orthopade. 2011. PMID: 21614600 German.
-
Does hip resurfacing require larger acetabular cups than conventional THA?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Apr;467(4):923-8. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0689-2. Epub 2009 Jan 14. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009. PMID: 19142691 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of head size on the development of metallic wear and on the characteristics of carbon layers in metal-on-metal hip joints.Acta Orthop. 2009 Jun;80(3):283-90. doi: 10.3109/17453670902988394. Acta Orthop. 2009. PMID: 19421914 Free PMC article.
-
Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Poor Survivorship and Frequent Complications at a Median of 10 Years After Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Revision.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Feb;475(2):300-303. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5160-1. Epub 2016 Nov 14. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017. PMID: 27844400 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Is patient selection important for hip resurfacing?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):56-65. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0558-z. Epub 2008 Oct 22. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009. PMID: 18941859 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials