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

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions

 

  CURRENT TRENDS AND CONTROVERSIES IN HIP DISORDERS - PART I 

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

Copyright © 2010 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

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


PDF


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.

top of page