Quality of life in different age groups after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.V. Papavasiliou ◽  
Richard N. Villar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal

Quality of Life in Different Age Groups after Metal-On-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.V. Papavasiliou ◽  
R.N. Villar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Group I ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
One Year

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is known to improve quality of life (QoL) and allow increased activity levels in young patients. It is, however, traditionally offered to the younger age group of patients, largely those aged under 60 years. We studied 42 consecutive patients (42 hips) aged 60 years or over (mean age 64) and 41 consecutive patients (42 hips) under this age (mean age 49), all of whom had undergone a metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A modified Harris hip score was translated to QoL scores using the Rosser Index Matrix immediately pre-operatively and at six weeks, six months, one year and four years after surgery. We found a significant improvement in QoL for both groups (p<0.0001) but no difference between the two groups. The maximum improvement was reached one year after surgery. Implant survival at four years was also similar (97.6% for group I and 100% for group II). We thus conclude that in carefully selected active patients aged 60 years and over, hip resurfacing arthroplasty provides significant and equal QoL improvement as it does for those under this age with similar implant survival. For this reason, age alone should not influence a surgeon's decision to proceed with a hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

scholarly journals Patients Report Improvement in Quality of Life and Satisfaction After Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2012 ◽  
Vol 471 (2) ◽  
pp. 444-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wael A. Rahman ◽  
Nelson V. Greidanus ◽  
Alexander Siegmeth ◽  
Bassam A. Masri ◽  
Clive P. Duncan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty

Is a cementless fixation of the femoral component suitable for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty?

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 624-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harlan C Amstutz ◽  
Michel J Le Duff
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Femoral Component ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Male Patients

Background: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) typically uses a hybrid design (cemented femoral component and cementless acetabular shell) but has recently been performed with fully cementless components. There is a paucity of information on the clinical performance of these cementless designs. Methods: The UCLA clinical scores, SF-12 quality of life scores, complication rates, survivorship and radiographic signs of loosening or gross stress shielding of 39 hips (39 male patients) implanted with cementless HRA were compared with those of 40 hips (37 male patients) implanted with hybrid HRA during the same time frame. Results: There were no significant differences in postoperative clinical and quality of life scores, complication rates, or radiographic signs of loosening between the 2 groups. The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 97.2% for the cementless group and 100% for the hybrid group. This difference was not significant ( p = 0.3694). There were no femoral component failures in any of the 2 groups. Conclusions: At a mean follow-up of 6 years, there is no tangible difference between the performance of cementless HRA compared to hybrid HRA. The absence of learning curve associated with this device and the potential for better preservation of femoral neck bone mineral density suggest that this technology is well suited for young patients with good bone quality seeking to resume an active lifestyle including high-impact activities.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 637-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Shimmin ◽  
Paul E. Beaulé ◽  
Pat Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document