A comparison of two resurfacing arthroplasty implants: medium-term clinical and radiographic results

Hip Int. 2012 Sep-Oct;22(5):566-73. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.9749.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to perform a medium-term analysis comparing the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the CONSERVE® Plus (C+) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty systems. 137 hips were included in each cohort, with a mean follow-up of 60.0 ± 14.2 months and 63.3 ± 3.5 months in the C+ and BHR cohorts respectively. Latest review UCLA and HHS scores showed statistically significant improvements when compared with preoperative scores for both cohorts. UCLA and SF-12 physical component outcome scores were significantly different (p<0.01 and p = 0.04, respectively). Median serum chromium and cobalt levels were significantly increased in the BHR cohort (p = 0.001). Both cohorts demonstrated excellent Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates (96.9% in the C+ cohort, and 96.4% in the BHR cohort). Overall both implants appear to perform well in the medium term.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods*
  • Chromium / blood
  • Cobalt / blood
  • Equipment Failure Analysis
  • Female
  • Health Status
  • Hip Joint / diagnostic imaging
  • Hip Joint / physiopathology
  • Hip Joint / surgery
  • Hip Prosthesis*
  • Humans
  • Kaplan-Meier Estimate
  • Male
  • Metal-on-Metal Joint Prostheses*
  • Osteoarthritis, Hip / physiopathology
  • Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery
  • Prosthesis Design
  • Prosthesis Failure*
  • Radiography
  • Range of Motion, Articular
  • Recovery of Function
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome

Substances

  • Chromium
  • Cobalt