Mahmut UĞURLU, Mehtap BALABAN, İzzet BİNGÖL

Birmingham hip resurfacing: Short term results

Aim: Hip joint replacement provides a dramatic improvement in the quality of life of patients with hip arthrosis but this effect has not been fully achieved in young patients because of early failure with total hip arthroplasty with high activity level. A bone mass protective procedure such as hip resurfacing arthroplasty might be advantageous in young patients. Many options for hip resurfacing prosthesis are available. One of the most used is the Birmingham hip resurfacing prosthesis. The purpose of this investigation compared retrospectively the functional, clinical and radiological outcomes of patients who underwent Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty by a single surgeon for various hip arthrosis.Materials and Methods: Twenty-six hips of 22 patients (12 male, 10 female) were evaluated by using Harris hip score preoperatively and postoperatively. Anteroposterior, lateral and cross-table lateral radiographs of the pelvis and hips were evaluated with respect to component position, migration, and radiolucency postoperatively and at every follow up. Acetabular inclination and anteversion angle, implant-femoral shaft angle, varus and valgus positon, pseudotumor formation around the hip were evaluated by radiologist. Blood samples of patients were taken at last follow ups and evaluated for cobalt and chromium levels by using an inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometer. Results: Postoperative Harris hip scorewas found to be significantly higher than preoperative Harris hip score. Correlation between chromium ion and size of femoral component, cobalt ion and cup anteversion angle had inverse relationship. There was significant correlation between cobalt ion and gender; females had higher levels of cobalt ion than males.Conclusion: In order to avoid ion load in Birmingham hip resurfacing, caution in selection of patients, avoidance of the use of small components, and attention to the surgical technique to ensure proper placement of the component angles are crucial.

PDF

___

1. McMinn DJ, Daniel J, Ziaee H, et al. Indications and results of hip resurfacing. Int Orthop 2011;35:231-7.
2. Hayaishi Y, Miki H, Nishii T, et al. Proximal femoral bone mineral density after resurfacing total hip arthroplasty and after standard stem-type cementless total hip arthroplasty, both having similar neck preservation and the same articulation type. J Arthroplasty 2007;22:1208-13.
3. Shimmin AJ, Bare J, Back DL. Complications associated with hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 2005;36:187-93.
4. Mehra A, Berryman F, Matharu GS, et al. Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: A Single Surgeon Series Reported at a Minimum of 10 Years Follow-Up. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:1160-6.
5. Matharu GS, McBryde CW, Pynsent WB, et al. The outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing in patients aged < 50 years up to 14 years postoperatively. Bone Joint J2013;95-B:1172-7.
6. Haddad FS, Thakrar RR, Hart AJ, et al. Metal-on-metal Bearings: The Evidence So Far. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011;93:572-9.
7. Schmalzried TP. Total resurfacing for osteonecrosis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;429:151-6.
8. Grecula MJ. Resurfacing arthroplasty in osteonecrosis of the hip. Orthop Clin North Am 2005;36:231-42.
9. Daniel J, Ziaee H, Salama A, et al. The effect of the diameter of metal-on-metal bearings on systemic exposure to cobalt and chromium. Bone Joint Surg Br2006;88:443-8.
10. Parry MC, Eastaugh-Waring S, Bannister GC, et al. Blood levels of cobalt and chromium are inversely correlated to head size after metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty. Hip Int2013;23:529-34.
11. Mehra A, Berryman F, Matharu GS, et al. Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: A Single Surgeon Series Reported at a Minimum of 10 Years Follow-Up. JArthroplasty 2015;30:1160-6.
12. Miller Mark D Miller M, Edition. Review of Orthopaedics. Saunders, Philadelphia 2004.
13. McMinn DJ, Daniel J, Ziaee H, et al. Indications and results of hip resurfacing. Int Orthop 2011;35:231-7.
14. Langton DJ, Sprowson AP, Joyce TJ, et al. Blood metal ion concentrations after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a comparative study of articular surface replacement and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:1287-95.
15. Tai SM, Millard N, Munir S, et al. Two year serum metal ion levels in minimally invasive total conservative hip resurfacing: preliminary results of a prospective study. ANZ J Surg 2015;85:164-8.
16. Gross TP, Liu F. Prevalence of dysplasia as the source of worse outcome in young female patients after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Int Orthop 2012;36:27-34.
17. Liu F, Gross TP. A safe zone for acetabular component position in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: winner of the 2012 HAP PAUL award. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:1224-30.