Hip resurfacing arthroplasty: The evolution of contemporary designs

Abstract Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is considered by many as the most significant recent development in hip arthroplasty. It preserves proximal femoral bone stock, optimizes stress transfer to the proximal femur, and offers inherent stability and optimal range of movement. The early results of hip resurfacing in the 1970s and 1980s were poor and the procedure was largely abandoned by the mid-1980s. The expectation that these prostheses would be easy to revise was not often fulfilled. The large diameter of the articulation combined with thin polyethylene cups or liners resulted in accelerated wear and the production of large volumes of biologically active particulate debris, leading to bone loss and implant loosening. Failure has been attributed to other factors, mainly avascular necrosis of the femoral head. However, this concern has not been confirmed by retrieval studies. The failure of early hip resurfacings was essentially a consequence of the use of inappropriate materials, poor implant design, inadequate instrumentation, and crude surgical technique. It was not an inherent problem with the procedure itself. The renaissance of metal-on-metal articulations for total hip arthroplasty enabled the introduction of new hip resurfacings and most of the major implant manufacturers have already introduced such systems. Early results are encouraging and complications commonly seen in the 1970s and 1980s, such as early implant loosening and femoral neck fracture, now appear to be rare. Whilst early results should be regarded with caution, modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing potentially offers the ultimate bone preservation and restoration of function in appropriately selected young patients.

[1]  C. Trentani,et al.  The Paltrinieri-Trentani hip joint resurface arthroplasty. , 1982, The Orthopedic cllinics of North America.

[2]  P. Herberts,et al.  The Swedish Total Hip Replacement Register , 2002, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  S. Kawachi,et al.  Socket-cup arthroplasty. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  Duncan Dowson,et al.  A hip joint simulator study of the performance of metal-on-metal joints: Part II: design. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[5]  T P Schmalzried,et al.  The Contribution of Frictional Torque to Loosening at the Cement-Bone Interface in Tharies Hip Replacements* , 1996, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  C. Rieker,et al.  Influence of the clearance on in-vitro tribology of large diameter metal-on-metal articulations pertaining to resurfacing hip implants. , 2005, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[7]  N. Kaibara,et al.  Socket and cup surface replacement of the hip. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[8]  F. Dorey,et al.  Evolution and future of surface replacement of the hip , 1998, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[9]  H. Amstutz,et al.  Total hip articular replacement by internal eccentric shells: the "tharies" approach to total surface replacement arthroplasty. , 1977, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[10]  P. Roberts,et al.  The evolution of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. , 2005, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[11]  P Roberts,et al.  Comparison of Contact Mechanics between a Total Hip Replacement and a Hip Resurfacing with a Metal-On-Metal Articulation , 2005 .

[12]  J. Charnley TISSUE REACTIONS TO POLYTETRAFLUORETHYLENE , 1963 .

[13]  J. Archard Contact and Rubbing of Flat Surfaces , 1953 .

[14]  P. Campbell,et al.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[15]  Harlan C. Amstutz,et al.  Metal on Metal Bearings in Hip Arthroplasty , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  H. Wagner,et al.  Surface replacement arthroplasty of the hip. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  C. Rieker,et al.  Analysis of 118 second-generation metal-on-metal retrieved hip implants , 1999 .

[18]  Haboush Ej A new operation for arthroplasty of the hip based on biomechanics, photoelasticity, fast-setting dental acrylic, and other considerations. , 1953 .

[19]  P. Campbell,et al.  Endoprostheses for osteonecrosis of the femoral head , 1995, International Orthopaedics.

[20]  Y. Gerard Hip arthroplasty by matching cups. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[21]  M. Müller The benefits of metal-on-metal total hip replacements. , 1995, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research.

[22]  C. Rieker,et al.  In vivo tribological performance of 231 metal-on-metal hip articulations. , 2002, Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy.

[23]  J. Judet,et al.  The use of an artificial femoral head for arthroplasty of the hip joint. , 1950, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[24]  M. Smith-Petersen Evolution of mould arthroplasty of the hip joint. , 1948, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[25]  P. Campbell,et al.  Precision-fit surface hemiarthroplasty for femoral head osteonecrosis. Long-term results. , 1994, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[26]  Michael Tanzer,et al.  The Otto Aufranc Award. Wear and lubrication of metal-on-metal hip implants. , 1999, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[27]  K. Knahr,et al.  Cement-free bioceramic double-cup endoprosthesis of the hip-joint. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[28]  J Charnley,et al.  Arthroplasty of the hip. A new operation. , 1961, Lancet.

[29]  M. Müller Lessons of 30 years of total hip arthroplasty. , 1992, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[30]  S. Tanaka Surface replacement of the hip joint. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[31]  B. Weber Experience With the Metasul Total Hip Bearing System , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[32]  D. Howie,et al.  The viability of the femoral head after resurfacing hip arthroplasty in humans. , 1993, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[33]  M. Wagner,et al.  Preliminary Results of Uncemented Metal on Metal Stemmed and Resurfacing Hip Replacement Arthroplasty , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[34]  P. Pynsent,et al.  Metal on Metal Surface Replacement of the Hip: Experience of the McMinn Prosthesis , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[35]  Duncan Dowson,et al.  A hip joint simulator study of the performance of metal-on-metal joints: Part I: the role of materials. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[36]  D W Murray,et al.  Osteonecrosis in retrieved femoral heads after failed resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[37]  P. Campbell,et al.  Viability of femoral heads treated with resurfacing arthroplasty. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[38]  M. Freeman Some anatomical and mechanical considerations relevant to the surface replacement of the femoral head. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.