Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision
- PMID: 20180719
- PMCID: PMC2856206
- DOI: 10.3109/17453671003685434
Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision
Abstract
Background and purpose: The outcome of modern resurfacing remains to be determined. The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) started collection of data on hip resurfacing at a time when modern resurfacing was started in Australia. The rate of resurfacing has been higher in Australia than in many other countries. As a result, the AOANJRR has one of the largest series of resurfacing procedures. This study was undertaken to determine the results of this series and the risk factors associated with revision.
Patients and methods: Data from the AOANJRR were used to analyze the survivorship of 12,093 primary resurfacing hip replacements reported to the Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2008. This was compared to the results of primary conventional total hip replacement reported during the same period. The Kaplan-Meier method and proportional hazards models were used to determine risk factors such as age, sex, femoral component size, primary diagnosis, and implant design.
Results: Female patients had a higher revision rate than males; however, after adjusting for head size, the revision rates were similar. Prostheses with head sizes of less than 50 mm had a higher revision rate than those with head sizes of 50 mm or more. At 8 years, the cumulative per cent revision of hip resurfacing was 5.3 (4.6-6.2), as compared to 4.0 (3.8-4.2) for total hip replacement. However, in osteoarthritis patients aged less than 55 years with head sizes of 50 mm or more, the 7-year cumulative per cent revision for hip resurfacing was 3.0 (2.2-4.2). Also, hips with dysplasia and some implant designs had an increased risk of revision.
Interpretation: Risk factors for revision of resurfacing were older patients, smaller femoral head size, patients with developmental dysplasia, and certain implant designs. These results highlight the importance of patient and prosthesis selection in optimizing the outcome of hip resurfacing.
Figures





Similar articles
-
Is the Survivorship of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Better Than Selected Conventional Hip Arthroplasties in Men Younger Than 65 Years of Age? A Study from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Nov;478(11):2625-2636. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000001453. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020. PMID: 32898048 Free PMC article.
-
Five-year results of the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System: an analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 Dec 21;93(24):2287-93. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01727. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011. PMID: 22258775
-
What Is the Rerevision Rate After Revising a Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty? Analysis From the AOANJRR.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Nov;473(11):3458-64. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4215-z. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015. PMID: 25721576 Free PMC article.
-
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patients younger than 50 years: a retrospective analysis : 1285 cases, 12-year survivorship.J Orthop Surg Res. 2017 Jun 2;12(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s13018-017-0579-y. J Orthop Surg Res. 2017. PMID: 28578684 Free PMC article. Review.
-
[Hip resurfacing in patients under 55 years of age].Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011;155(38):A3186. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011. PMID: 21939567 Review. Dutch.
Cited by
-
Do survival rate and serum ion concentrations 10 years after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing provide evidence for continued use?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Nov;470(11):3118-26. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2329-0. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012. PMID: 22481276 Free PMC article.
-
Surface Characterization of Retrieved Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Implants from Patients with Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris.Materials (Basel). 2014 Mar 4;7(3):1866-1879. doi: 10.3390/ma7031866. Materials (Basel). 2014. PMID: 28788544 Free PMC article.
-
The Choice of Hip Arthroplasty: HRA or THA? Revealed by Meta-Analysis.Orthop Surg. 2025 Jun;17(6):1577-1588. doi: 10.1111/os.70019. Epub 2025 Mar 16. Orthop Surg. 2025. PMID: 40090766 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Joint registry approach for identification of outlier prostheses.Acta Orthop. 2013 Aug;84(4):348-52. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.831320. Acta Orthop. 2013. PMID: 23992139 Free PMC article.
-
Risk factor analysis for early femoral failure in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: the effect of bone density and body mass index.J Orthop Surg Res. 2012 Jan 10;7:1. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-7-1. J Orthop Surg Res. 2012. PMID: 22233783 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Amstutz HC, Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: Two to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2004;86:28–39. - PubMed
-
- Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry 2009. Annual Report. Adelaide:AOA. - PubMed
-
- Back DL, Dalziel R, Young D, Shimmin A. Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings: An independent prospective study of the first 230 hips. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2005;87:324–9. - PubMed
-
- Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, LeDuff M, Gruen T, Amstutz HC. Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop. 2004;((418)):87–93. - PubMed
-
- Boerre NR, Bannister GC. Cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 50 years of age: Ten to 18 year results. Clin Orthop. 1993;((287)):153–9. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials