Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 91-B, Issue 11, 1454-1458.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B11.22651  
Copyright © 2009 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eswaramoorthy, V. K.
Right arrow Articles by Field, R. E.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eswaramoorthy, V. K.
Right arrow Articles by Field, R. E.

Clinical and radiological outcome of stemmed hip replacement after revision from metal-on-metal resurfacing

V. K. Eswaramoorthy, MRCS, Clinical Research Fellow1; L. C. Biant, MS, FRCS Ed(Trauma & Orth), Consultant Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgeon2; and R. E. Field, PhD, FRCS, FRCS(Orth), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon and Director of Research1

1 Research & Education South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Dorking Road, Epsom, Surrey KT18 7EG, UK.
2 Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Little France Crescent, Old Dalkeith Road, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, UK.

Correspondence should be sent to Dr V. K. Eswaramoorthy; e-mail: vasanth22{at}yahoo.com

We report the outcome of total hip replacement in 29 failed metal-on-metal resurfacing hip replacements in which the primary surgery was performed between August 1995 and February 2005. The mean length of follow-up was five years (1.7 to 11.7). Of the 29 hip resurfacings, 19 acetabular components and all the femoral components were revised (28 uncemented stems and one cemented stem). There were no deaths and none of the patients was lost to follow-up. None of the hips underwent any further revision. The results of the revision resurfacing group were compared with those of a control group of age-matched patients. In the latter group there were 236 primary total hip replacements and 523 resurfacings performed during the same period by the same surgeons.

The outcome of the revision resurfacing group was comparable with that of the stemmed primary hip replacement group but was less good than that of the primary hip resurfacing group. Long-term follow-up is advocated to monitor the outcome of these cases.






(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