The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 23, Issue 7 , Pages 1074-1079 , October 2008

Painful Impingement of the Hip Joint After Total Hip Resurfacing: A Report of Two Cases

  • Martin Lavigne, MD, MSc, FRCS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Martin Lavigne, MD, FRCS, 5345, boul. de l'Assomption, suite 55, Montréal, Québec, Canada H1T 4B3.
    • ,
  • Krishna R. Boddu Siva Rama, MS, MRCS

      Affiliations

    • Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • ,
  • Alain Roy, MD, FRCS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • ,
  • Pascal-André Vendittoli, MD, MSc, FRCS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
    • Department of Surgery, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada

Received 12 September 2006 ,Accepted 6 September 2007.

References 

  1. Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, et al. Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop. 2003;417:112
  2. Lavigne M, Parvizi J, Beck M, et al. Anterior femoroacetabular impingement: part I. Techniques of joint preserving surgery. Clin Orthop. 2004;418:61
  3. Chandler DR, Glousman R, Hull D, et al. Prosthetic hip range of motion and impingement. The effects of head and neck geometry. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;166:284
  4. Swanson SA. Engineering considerations in the design of double-cup hip replacement prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1978;134:12
  5. Clarke IC. Symposium on surface replacement arthroplasty of the hip. Biomechanics: multifactorial design choices--an essential compromise?. Orthop Clin North Am. 1982;13:681
  6. Eijer H, Leunig M, Mahomed R, et al. Cross-table lateral radiographs for screening of anterior femoral head-neck offset in patients with femoro-acetabular impingement. Hip Int. 2001;11:37
  7. Doherty SD, Thompson MT, Usrey MM, et al. The impact of arthroplasty on hip motion: resurfacing vs THR vs the intact joint. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society, Chicago Paper No: 0526. 2006;
  8. Amstutz HC, Thomas BJ, Jinnah R, et al. Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip. A comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66:228
  9. Ganz R, Gill TJ, Gautier E, et al. Surgical dislocation of the adult hip a technique with full access to the femoral head and acetabulum without the risk of avascular necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:1119
  10. Lavigne M. Component sizing: a key concept for bone preservation and restoration of optimal clinical function after total hip resurfacing. Osteologie. 2005;14(Suppl 2):63
  11. Mardones RM, Gonzalez C, Chen Q, et al. Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: evaluation of the effect of the size of the resection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Feb;87(2):273
  12. Vendittoli P-A, Ganapathi M, Nuno N, et al. Factors affecting hip range of motion in surface replacement arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2007;22:1004

 No benefits or funds were received in support of the study.

PII: S0883-5403(07)00549-9

doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.09.011

The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 23, Issue 7 , Pages 1074-1079 , October 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution