Advanced search
Publication Cover
Acta Orthopaedica Volume 84, 2013 - Issue 3
Journal homepage
1,589
Views
17
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Hip

Similar range of motion and function after resurfacing large–head or standard total hip arthroplasty

2–year results from a randomized clinical trial

Jeannette Østergaard PennyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense;Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Naestved Hospital, Naestved; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.Correspondence[email protected]
,
Ole OvesenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
,
Jens–Erik VarmarkenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Naestved Hospital, Naestved
&
Søren OvergaardDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Pages 246-253 | Published online: 26 Mar 2013

  • Amstutz HC, Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA. Metal–on–metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six–year follow–up study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2004; 86: 28–39.
  • Anissian HL, Stark A, Gustafson A, Good V, Clarke IC. Metal–on–metal bearing in hip prosthesis generates 100–fold less wear debris than metal–on–polyethylene. Acta Orthop Scand 1999; 70: 578–82.
  • Bader R, Scholz R, Steinhauser E, Zimmermann S, Busch R, Mittelmeier W. The influence of head and neck geometry on stability of total hip replacement: a mechanical test study. Acta Orthop Scand 2004; 75: 415–21.
  • Beaule PE, Schmalzried TP, Udomkiat P, Amstutz HC. Jumbo femoral head for the treatment of recurrent dislocation following total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2002; 84: 256–63.
  • Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15: 1833–40.
  • Bengs BC, Sangiorgio SN, Ebramzadeh E. Less range of motion with resurfacing arthroplasty than with total hip arthroplasty: in vitro examination of 8 designs. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 755–62.
  • Bohannon RW. Number of pedometer–assessed steps taken per day by adults: a descriptive meta–analysis 3. Phys Ther 2007; 1642–50.
  • Bryant MJ, Kernohan WG, Nixon JR, Mollan RA. A statistical analysis of hip scores. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1993; 75: 705–9.
  • Burroughs BR, Hallstrom B, Golladay GJ, Hoeffel D, Harris WH. Range of motion and stability in total hip arthroplasty with 28–, 32–, 38–, and 44–mm femoral head sizes. J Arthroplasty 2005; 20: 11–9.
  • Costa ML, Achten J, Parsons NR, Edlin RP, Foguet P, Prakash U, Griffin DR. Total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of patients with arthritis of the hip joint: single centre, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2012; 344: e2147.
  • Daniel J, Ziaee H, Pradhan C, McMinn DJ. Six–year results of a prospective study of metal ion levels in young patients with metal–on–metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2009; 91: 176–9.
  • Davis KE, Ritter MA, Berend ME, Meding JB. The importance of range of motion after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 2007; (465): 180–4.
  • Dela Rosa A, Silva M, Heisel C, Reich M, Schmalzried P. Range of motion after total hip resurfacing. Orthopeadics 2007; 30: 352–7.
  • Garbuz DS, Tanzer M, Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The John Charnley Award: Metal–on–metal hip resurfacing versus large–diameter head metal–on–metal total hip arthroplasty: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop 2010; (468) (2): 318–25
  • Garellick G, Rogmark C, Karrholm J, Herberts P. Annual report 2009. The Swedish hip register, 2011.
  • Graves S, Davidson D, Tomkins A. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide:AOA; 2011 http://www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/documents/AnnualReports2011/AnnualReport_2011_WebVersion.pdf. 2011.
  • Hakkinen A, Borg H, Kautiainen H, Anttila E, Hakkinen K, Ylinen J, Kiviranta I. Muscle strength and range of movement deficits 1 year after hip resurfacing surgery using posterior approach. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32: 483–91.
  • Hing CB, Back DL, Bailey M, Young DA, Dalziel RE, Shimmin AJ. The results of primary Birmingham hip resurfacings at a mean of five years: An independent prospective review of the first 230 hips. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2007; 89: 1431–8.
  • Holm I, Bolstad B, Lutken T, Ervik A, Rokkum M, Steen H. Reliability of goniometric measurements and visual estimates of hip ROM in patients with osteoarthrosis. Physiother Res Int 2000; 5: 241–8.
  • Howie DW, McGee MA, Costi K, Graves SE. Metal–on–metal resurfacing versus total hip replacement–the value of a randomized clinical trial. Orthop Clin North Am 2005; 36: 195–201.
  • Jensen C, Aagaard P, Overgaard S. Recovery in mechanical muscle strength following resurfacing vs standard total hip arthroplasty – a randomised clinical trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2011; 19: 1108–16.
  • Johanson PE, Fenstad AM, Furnes O, Garellick G, Havelin LI, Overgaard S, Pedersen AB, Karrholm J. Inferior outcome after hip resurfacing arthroplasty than after conventional arthroplasty. Evidence from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) database, 1995 to 2007. Acta Orthop 2010; 81: 535–41.
  • Karrholm J, Garellick G, Rogmark C, Herberts P. The Swedish hip register. Annual Report 2007. http://www.shpr.se/sv/Publications/DocumentsReports.aspx. The Swedish hip register. 2008: 58–9. 18–11–2008.
  • Kluess D, Zietz C, Lindner T, Mittelmeier W, Schmitz KP, Bader R. Limited range of motion of hip resurfacing arthroplasty due to unfavorable ratio of prosthetic head size and femoral neck diameter. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 748–54.
  • Kuijer PP, de Beer MJ, Houdijk JH, Frings–Dresen MH. Beneficial and limiting factors affecting return to work after total knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil 2009; 19: 375–81.
  • Lavigne M, Therrien M, Nantel J, Roy A, Prince F, Vendittoli PA. The John Charnley Award: The Functional Outcome of Hip Resurfacing and Large–head THA Is the Same: A Randomized, Double–blind Study. Clin Orthop 2010; (468) (2): 326-36.
  • Lavigne M, Ganapathi M, Mottard S, Girard J, Vendittoli PA. Range of motion of large head total hip arthroplasty is greater than 28 mm total hip arthroplasty or hip resurfacing. Clin Biomech (Bristol. Avon ) 2011; 26: 267–73.
  • Le Duff MJ, Wisk LE, Amstutz HC. Range of motion after stemmed total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing – a clinical study. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2009; 67: 177–81.
  • Mobasheri R, Gidwani S, Rosson JW. The effect of total hip replacement on the employment status of patients under the age of 60 years. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006; 88: 131–3.
  • Nissen T, Douw K, Overgaard S. Patient–reported outcome of hip resurfacing arthroplasty and standard total hip replacement after short–term follow–up. Dan Med Bull 2011; 58: A4310.
  • Overgaard S, Lucht U, Varmarken JE, Pedersen AB, Bartels P. The Danish Hip arthroplasty register. Annual report 2007. The Danish Hip arthroplasty register, 2008. 18–11–2008.
  • Padgett DE, Lipman J, Robie B, Nestor BJ. Influence of total hip design on dislocation: a computer model and clinical analysis. Clin Orthop 2006; (447): 48–52.
  • Porter M, Borroff M, Gregg P, Howard P, MacGregor A, Tucker K. National Joint Registry for England and Wales. 8th. annual report 2011. Surgical data to December 31st. 2010 http://www.njrcentre.org.uk/NjrCentre/Portals/0/Documents/NJR%208th%20Annual%20Report%202011.pdf. 2012.
  • Schmalzried TP, Shepherd EF, Dorey FJ, Jackson WO, dela RM, Fa’vae F, McKellop HA, McClung CD, Martell J, Moreland JR, Amstutz HC. The John Charnley Award. Wear is a function of use, not time. Clin Orthop 2000; (381): 36–46.
  • Schneider PL, Crouter SE, Lukajic O, Bassett DR, Jr. Accuracy and reliability of 10 pedometers for measuring steps over a 400–m walk. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003; 35: 1779–84.
  • Sharma V, Morgan PM, Cheng EY. Factors influencing Early rehabilitation after THA: A systematic review. Clin Orthop 2009; (467) (6): 1400–11.
  • Spieker F, Plougsing J. SOCIO – The socioeconomical classification from Statistics Denmark (in Danish). 1. edition., 1–16. 1997. Statistics Denmark. 1–12–2009.
  • Stulberg BN, Fitts SM, Bowen AR, Zadzilka JD. Early Return to Function After Hip Resurfacing Is It Better Than Contemporary Total Hip Arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty 2010; 25 (5): 748-53.
  • Swank ML, Alkire MR. Minimally invasive hip resurfacing compared to minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2009; 67: 113–5.
  • The Danish ministry of Occupation. Analysis of the Danish Sick abcense (Danish). 1–80. 2001. The Danish ministry of Occupation.
  • Vail TP, Mina CA, Yergler JD, Pietrobon R. Metal–on–Metal Hip Resurfacing Compares Favorably with THA at 2 Years Followup. Clin Orthop 2006; (453): 123–31.
  • van der Wegen, Hoekstra HJ, Sijbesma T, Bos E, Schemitsch EH, Poolman RW. Survival of metal–on–metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2011; 93: 298–306.
  • Vendittoli PA, Lavigne M, Roy A, Lusignan D. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing metal on metal total hip arthroplasty and metal on metal total hip resurfacing in patients less than 65 years old. Hip International 2006; 16: 73–81.
  • Wittrup–Jensen KU, Lauridsen J, Gudex C, Pedersen KM. Generation of a Danish TTO value set for EQ–5D health states. Scand J Public Health 2009; 37: 459–66.
  • Zahiri CA, Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, Amstutz HC. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13: 890–5.
  • Zhou YX, Guo SJ, Liu Q, Tang J, Li YJ. Influence of the femoral head size on early postoperative gait restoration after total hip arthroplasty. Chin Med J (Engl ) 2009; 122: 1513–6.
  • Zijlstra WP, van d A–S, I, Zee MJ, van Raay JJ. No clinical difference between large metal–on–metal total hip arthroplasty and 28–mm–head total hip arthroplasty? Int Orthop 2011; 35: 1771–6.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.