Document Detail


A comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty - patients and outcomes.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  19583535     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
A comparison of pertinent preoperative and postoperative data relative to total hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty (THA) would assist in evaluating current perceptions in outcome. We compared 50 consecutive metal-metal resurfacing replacements in 50 patients with 44 consecutive conventional total hip arthroplasties in 35 patients, who were implanted during the same time period, by the same surgeon, and followed prospectively for 2 to 4 years. The patients undergoing hip resurfacing were 62% male, 9 years younger, and 3.2 inches taller, with a lower mean body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade than patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Preoperatively, patients undergoing resurfacing had a lower Harris hip score (46 vs 52 points), more pain, higher UCLA (University of California at Los Angeles) activity scores (4.2 vs 3.6), and better range of motion. Surgical time for resurfacing was 18% longer, but there was less total blood loss and fewer transfusions. Postoperatively, there was no difference in Harris hip score (97 vs 96). Patients undergoing resurfacing had higher function, Short Form-12 physical activity scores, and UCLA activity scores, but also a higher incidence of slight or mild pain. There were no differences in postoperative range of motion or dislocation (one each). The preoperative characteristics and general health status of the average patient undergoing resurfacing are more favorable than that of the average patient undergoing conventional total hip arthroplasty. Caution should be applied in attributing differences in outcomes directly to the arthroplasty technology.
Authors:
Vincent A Fowble; Mylene A dela Rosa; Thomas P Schmalzried
Related Documents :
20613475 - Anemia and patient blood management in hip and knee surgery: a systematic review of the...
8625585 - Core decompression for osteonecrosis of the femoral head.
11180915 - Preliminary traction and the use of under-thigh pillows to prevent avascular necrosis o...
19583535 - A comparison of total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty - patients and outcomes.
16996925 - Bovine jugular vein conduit for right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction: evaluat...
18313105 - The efficacy of transurethral resection of the prostate in the patients with weak bladd...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Comparative Study; Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases     Volume:  67     ISSN:  1936-9719     ISO Abbreviation:  -     Publication Date:  2009  
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2009-07-08     Completed Date:  2009-08-28     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101300541     Medline TA:  Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  108-12     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Joint Replacement Institute, St. Vincent Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Adult
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects,  instrumentation,  methods*
Blood Loss, Surgical / prevention & control
Blood Transfusion
Female
Hip Joint / physiopathology,  surgery*
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
Male
Metals
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis, Hip / physiopathology,  surgery*
Osteonecrosis / physiopathology,  surgery*
Pain Measurement
Pain, Postoperative / etiology,  prevention & control
Patient Selection
Prospective Studies
Prosthesis Design
Range of Motion, Articular
Recovery of Function
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Chemical
Reg. No./Substance:
0/Metals

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Perceptions concerning hip resurfacing from attendees at the second annual u.s. Comprehensive course...
Next Document:  Minimally invasive hip resurfacing compared to minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty.