Eleven Years of Experience With Metal-on-Metal Hybrid Hip Resurfacing: A Review of 1000 Conserve Plus
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
From November of 1996 to September 2006, 1000 hips (838 patients) were implanted by the senior author (HCA) with the Conserve Plus metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing device. The series started with the very first hip ever implanted with this design. The indications for the procedure at the time were very wide. There were no exclusion criteria either for bone quality (cysts) or quantity (osteoporosis) as long as the procedure was technically feasible and a total of 354 hips were resurfaced
Results
The mean follow-up for the whole series of 1000 hips was 5.6 years (range, 1.1-11.0 years). At the time of writing, 36 hips (30 patients) had no postoperative follow-up, 2 of them being considered lost to follow-up.
The mean preoperative UCLA hip scores were 3.6 ± 1.2 (SD) for pain, 6.4 ± 1.4 for walking, 5.8 ± 1.6 for function, and 4.7 ± 1.5 for activity. At last follow-up, UCLA hip scores were 9.4 ± 0.9 for pain, 9.6 ± 0.9 for walking, 9.5 ± 1.2 for function, and 7.5 ± 1.6 for activity. All
Discussion
There were no conversions to THR consecutive to a loosening of the acetabular component in this series. This result is of great importance as it justifies the concept of resurfacing in young and active patients who are likely to undergo more than 1 procedure during their lifetime: the durability of well-fixed porous-coated acetabular components retained at revision surgery has been demonstrated [19] and the availability of unipolar femoral heads matching the socket dimensions potentially
References (29)
- et al.
Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis
J Bone Joint Surg
(2004) Belgium experience with metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty
Orthop Clin North Am
(2005)- et al.
The effects of technique changes on aseptic loosening of the femoral component in hip resurfacing. Results of 600 Conserve Plus with a 3-9 year follow-up
J Arthroplasty
(2007) - et al.
Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral implant in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasty: minimum of two years follow-up
Orthop Clin North Am
(2005) - et al.
Hip resurfacing arthroplasty
J Am Acad Orthop Surg
(2006) - et al.
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years followup
Clin Orthop Relat Res
(2006) - et al.
Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six year follow-up
J Bone Joint Surg
(2004) - et al.
The femoral head/neck offset and hip resurfacing
J Bone Joint Surg Br
(2007) - et al.
Early results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings. An independent prospective study of the first 230 hips
J Bone Joint Surg
(2005) - et al.
Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years
J Bone Joint Surg Br
(2005)
A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing in patients less than 65 years old
Hip Int
Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip. A comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty
J Bone Joint Surg
Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation
J Bone Joint Surg
A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity
Med Care
Cited by (0)
Funding for this study was provided by St Vincent Medical Center, Los Angeles, and Wright Medical Technologies Inc.