Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2010 February;61(1) > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2010 February;61(1):67-70

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEMINERVA ORTOPEDICA E TRAUMATOLOGICA

A Journal on Orthopedics and Traumatology


Official Journal of the Piedmontese-Ligurian-Lombard Society of Orthopedics and Traumatology
Indexed/Abtracted in: EMBASE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index

 

Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2010 February;61(1):67-70

CURRENT TRENDS AND CONTROVERSIES IN HIP DISORDERS - PART I 

Conventional total hip replacement vs. resurfacing total hip replacement: what’s best for my patient

De Smet K., Calistri A.

Orthopedic Department, ANCA Medical Centre Ghent, Belgium

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty has increased in popularity as a viable treatment option for young, active patients with osteoarthritis that find in this procedure the real option to return to their old habits of life. Early literature show that resurfacing hip arthroplasty patients had kinematics and kinetics (abduction moments, extension moments, and walking velocities) that approached normal values for patients without hip osteoarthritis. Many of the technical problems that affected resurfacing implants have been identified and resolved with improved engineering and manufacturing techniques. At the present time, failure for THA for all diagnoses in patients younger than fifty years old, as reported by the Swedish Arthroplasty Registry, was associated with a ten-year survival rate of 85%. In contrast HRA failure for any reason is rare and the ten-year survival rate from the best cohort were 95.5%- 96.1%. We do agree hip resurfacing arthroplasty only finds its place in high volume centres and experienced surgeons. We need further clarification by well planned prospective studies and evaluation of longer-term outcomes.

language: English


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page