title: Survivorship and clinical outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum ten years' follow-up.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Resurfacing as a percentage of total hip arthroplasty rose from 5.6 % in 2001 to 8.9 % in 2005 in Australia. During the same period the resurfacing to conventional prosthesis rose from 19.6 % to 29 % in the younger age group (less than 55 years). Long term (more than ten years) functional results of BHR are sparingly documented. Among the literatures available, the patient selection criteria vary from osteoarthritis, avascular necrosis, and dysplastic hip to slipped capital femoral epiphysis. The objective of the current study is to evaluate long term survivorship and functional outcome of Birmingham hip resurfacing surgery in osteoarthritic hip patients performed by a single surgeon.
  
  
  METHODS
  In this retrospective clinical study, all patients who underwent hip resurfacing for osteoarthritis of hip between 1999 and 2004 are included. All surgeries were performed by single surgeon (SJM) and in all patients Smith & Nephew system (Midland Medical Technologies, Birmingham, United Kingdom)) was used. Revision surgery is considered the end point of survivorship. Means, standard deviations, and confidence interval were calculated for all continuous measures. Survival analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The result is based on 222 patients (244 hips). This included 153 males and 69 females. Our mean follow up was 12.05 years and overall survival was 93.7 %. In terms of gender, survival in males was 95.43 % while in females it was 89.86 %. Failure was seen in 14 patients (16 hips), which included seven female (10.14 %) and seven male (4.57 %) patients. Failure of femoral components due to aseptic loosening and varus collapse was seen in eight patients after a mean 9.6 years. Metal allergy was seen in three patients (five hips), all of them were female of which two had bilateral resurfacing. Other complications included femoral neck stress fractures in two patients and acetabular component loosening in one patient. We observed that the failure rate is higher if the BHR femoral component size is 46 or less (ten out of 16 hips revised).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  If patient selection is judiciously done and surgical technique is meticulously followed, hip resurfacing offers acceptable survivorship, satisfactory range of motion and enables patients to resume high demand activities including sports. Future improvements in the bearing surfaces, and possibly in the design, might alleviate concerns posed by high serum metal level and provide options that continue to benefit younger patients in future.
authors.affiliation: King Fahd Hospital of the University, University of Dammam, Al-Khobar, 31952, Saudi Arabia. qazam47@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Md Quamar
authors.initials: MQ
authors.lastname: Azam
authors.affiliation: Malabar Orthopaedic Institute, The Avenue Hospital, 43, The Avenue, Windsor, Melbourne, 3141, Australia. steve.mcmahon@joint-replacements.com.
authors.forename: Stephen
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: McMahon
authors.affiliation: Malabar Orthopaedic Institute, The Avenue Hospital, 43, The Avenue, Windsor, Melbourne, 3141, Australia. Gabrielle@joint-replacements.com.
authors.forename: Gabrielle
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Hawdon
authors.affiliation: Malabar Orthopaedic Institute, The Avenue Hospital, 43, The Avenue, Windsor, Melbourne, 3141, Australia. sukeshrao.sankineni@gmail.com.
authors.forename: Sukesh Rao
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Sankineani
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods* / Q000401:mortality; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006621:Hip Joint / Q000601:surgery; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015207:Osteoarthritis, Hip / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D012086:Reoperation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016019:Survival Analysis; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: BHR; Long term; Outcome; Survivorship
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7 Suppl 3):57-60
references.pmid: 17919595
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2001 Dec;16(8 Suppl 1):134-9
references.pmid: 11742465
references.citation: Int Orthop. 2015 Sep;39(9):1803-11
references.pmid: 25655902
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2013 Jan;28(1):147-53
references.pmid: 22819379
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Jun;90(6):715-23
references.pmid: 18539663
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Aug;(329 Suppl):S89-98
references.pmid: 8769326
references.citation: J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006 Aug;14(8):454-63
references.pmid: 16885477
references.citation: Int Orthop. 2014 Nov;38(11):2251-7
references.pmid: 25030963
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2009 Jun;24(4):614-9
references.pmid: 18555654
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb;468(2):318-25
references.pmid: 19697090
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2006 Jan;21(1):18-22
references.pmid: 16446181
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2012 Jan;27(1):60-5
references.pmid: 21419593
references.citation: Int Orthop. 2012 Jul;36(7):1349-54
references.pmid: 22350138
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Mar;94(3):315-21
references.pmid: 22371536
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2012 Apr;27(4):533-538.e1
references.pmid: 21908168
references.citation: J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010 May;18(5):306-14
references.pmid: 20435881
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Feb;93(2):158-63
references.pmid: 21282752
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2013 May;28(5):842-8
references.pmid: 23489727
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2012 Jan;27(1):15-20
references.pmid: 21414743
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Jan;93(1):27-33
references.pmid: 21196539
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88 Suppl 3:98-103
references.pmid: 17079374
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2014 Jan;29(1):181-5
references.pmid: 23680504
references.citation: J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011 Apr;19(4):236-44
references.pmid: 21464217
references.citation: Bone Joint J. 2013 Sep;95-B(9):1172-7
references.pmid: 23997127
references.citation: Int Orthop. 2014 Jun;38(6):1139-45
references.pmid: 24370976
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2010 Apr;25(3):387-91
references.pmid: 19285379
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Sep;94(9):1180-6
references.pmid: 22933488
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2014 Aug;29(8):1571-5
references.pmid: 24780203
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2012 Jun;27(6):968-75
references.pmid: 22333868
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7 Suppl 3):61-5
references.pmid: 17919596
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):44-9
references.pmid: 18722302
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb;468(2):375-81
references.pmid: 19756906
references.citation: J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):36-43
references.pmid: 18639431
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Apr;94(4):471-6
references.pmid: 22434461