Letter to the editor.
Article Type: Letter to the editor
Authors: Della Valle, Craig J.
Barrack, Robert
Pub Date: 10/01/2009
Publication: Name: Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases Publisher: J. Michael Ryan Publishing Co. Audience: Academic Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Health Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2009 J. Michael Ryan Publishing Co. ISSN: 1936-9719
Issue: Date: Oct, 2009 Source Volume: 67 Source Issue: 4
Accession Number: 247225926
Full Text: Dear Editor:

We read with great interest the article by O'Neill and colleagues on the "Canadian Academic Experience with Metal-On-Metal Hip Resurfacing." (1) The article was informative and well written. We did notice, however, that our article evaluating the early U.S. experience with Birmingham hip resurfacing (2) following FDA approval was misquoted through no fault of the authors. The version of our abstract that was available when the article was written erroneously reported the 1-year revision rate at 7.4%, when the actual revision rate was 3.1% (14 of the 449 cases with 1-year follow-up). This error was not realized until after our work was available online as an electronic publication. Using this uncorrected version of our work simply repeated this error. The abstract of our findings available in PubMed has now been corrected. Additionally, a letter to the editor in the February 2009 issue of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research corrected the error as well. (3) We point this out so that the readers of the Bulletin have a clearer understanding of the data that has been reported.

Regards,

Craig J. Della Valle, M.D.

Robert Barrack, M.D.

References

(1.) O'Neill M, Beaule PE, Bin Nasser A, Garbuz D, Lavigne M, Duncan C, Kim PR, Schemitsch E. Canadian academic experience with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67(2):128-31.

(2.) Della Valle CJ, Nunley R, Raterman S, Barrack RL. Early American experience with hip resurfacing following FDA approval. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:72-8.

(3.) Erratum. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Feb;467(2):587

Response:

We thank Drs. Della Valle and Barrack for their letter which accurately reflects the reason that 7.4% was misquoted.

Sincerely,

Paul E. Beaule, M.D.
Gale Copyright: Copyright 2009 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.