Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, M.
Right arrow Articles by Bradley, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Freeman, M.
Right arrow Articles by Bradley, G.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 65-B, Issue 4, 405-411
Copyright © 1983 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery


Articles

ICLH surface replacement of the hip. An analysis of the first 10 years

MA Freeman and GW Bradley

Clinical experience of the ICLH method of resurfacing the hip now spans 10 years. The first 36 arthroplasties, performed between 1972 and 1974, have been previously reported. This review covers in detail 204 such arthroplasties performed between 1975 and 1979 using a standard operative technique and prosthesis; these hips were consecutive and entirely unselected. Follow-up averaged 3.2 years (range two to six years). Successful hips are comparable to hips successfully replaced with stemmed prostheses. The rates of perioperative complications and failure due to infection, ectopic ossification, fracture of the femoral neck, and dislocation are favourably comparable to rates reported for stemmed total hip arthroplasties. The rate of aseptic loosening (17 per cent) greatly exceeded that found for stemmed total hip arthroplasties. Errors of patient selection, operative technique and prosthetic design have been identified. It is concluded that, although resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip may be an appealing procedure with theoretical advantages in certain instances, patient selection is essential, operative technique is demanding and changes in the design of the prosthesis are required. The procedure is still in evolution and therefore it should not yet be generally employed.




(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General