The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 25, Issue 5 , Pages 748-753 , August 2010

Early Return to Function After Hip Resurfacing: Is It Better Than Contemporary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

  • Bernard N. Stulberg, MD

      Affiliations

    • Cleveland Clinic Orthopaedic and Rheumatologic Institute, Cleveland, Ohio
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Bernard N. Stulberg, MD, Cleveland Clinic Orthopaedic and Rheumatologic Institute, 1730 West 25th Street, 4E, Cleveland, OH 44113.
  • ,
  • Stephanie M. Fitts, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, New Jersey
  • ,
  • Ashlea R. Bowen, RAC

      Affiliations

    • Corin USA, Tampa, Florida
  • ,
  • Jayson D. Zadzilka, MS

      Affiliations

    • Cleveland Clinic Orthopaedic and Rheumatologic Institute, Cleveland, Ohio

Received 8 September 2008 ,Accepted 24 May 2009.

References 

  1. D'Antonio JA, Capello WN, Bierbaum B, et al. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings for total hip arthroplasty: 5-9 year follow-up. Semin Arthro. 2006;17:146
  2. Stulberg BN, Trier KK, Naughton M, et al. Results and lessons learned from a United States hip resurfacing investigational device exemption trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(Suppl 3):21
  3. Graves S, Davidson D, Ingerson L, et al. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide: AOA; 2005;[website] http://www.aoa.org.au/docs/njrrrep06.pdf
  4. Amstutz HC, Beaule PE, Dorey FJ, et al. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg. 2004;86-A:28
  5. Lilikakis AK, Vowler SL, Villar RN. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral implant in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasty: minimum of two years follow-up. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:215
  6. Pattyn C, De Smet K. Primary ceramic-on-ceramic THR versus metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in active young patients. In: AAOS Feb 23, 2005. Washington, DC. 2005;
  7. Mont MA, Seyler TM, et al. Gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:100
  8. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty: an end result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg. 1969;51-A:737
  9. 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. 1984;66-A:228
  10. Pollard TCB, Baker RP, Eastaugh-Waring SJ, et al. Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip: a five-to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg. 2006;88-B:592
  11. Vail TP, Mina CA, Yergler JD, et al. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing compares favorably with THA at 2 years follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:123
  12. Shimmin AJ, Bennell K, et al. Gait analysis comparison of the functional outcome of hip resurfacing and total hip replacement. In: AAOS Mar 5, 2008. San Francisco, CA. 2008;
  13. Lavigne M, Masse V, Roy A, Vendittoli PA. Return to sports after hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. In: AAOS Mar 5, 2008. San Francisco, CA. 2008;

 Benefits or funds were received in partial or total support of the research material described in this article. These benefits or support were received from the following sources: Research funds have been received from Stryker Orthopaedics/Corin USA in support of the material described in this article. In addition, BN Stulberg is a consultant for Stryker Orthopaedics; SM Fitts is an employee of Stryker Orthopaedics; and AR Bowen is an employee of Corin USA.

PII: S0883-5403(09)00220-4

doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.05.034

The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 25, Issue 5 , Pages 748-753 , August 2010