Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty for Aseptically Failed Metal-On-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty



      While common, studies assessing outcomes of failed metal-on-metal (MoM) resurfacings converted to total hip arthroplasties (THAs) are limited. We determined the outcomes following revision THA of aseptic MoM hip resurfacings.


      Between 2000 and 2019, we identified 52 revision THAs for failed MoM hip resurfacings through our total joint registry. Mean age was 55 years, 42% were women, and mean body mass index was 28 kg/m2. Adverse local tissue response led to THA in 67% of the cases. The most common revision articulation was metal-on-cross-linked or ceramic-on-cross-linked polyethylene (71%). Median head size was 36 mm. The acetabular component was retained in 21% and 28% used dual-mobility constructs. The mean follow-up was 6 years (range, 2-12 years).


      The 5-year survivorships free of any re-revision or reoperation were 89% and 85%, respectively. The primary cause of re-revision (6) was dislocation (4). The 5-year cumulative probability of dislocation was 19% and was 13% in those patients treated with dual-mobility constructs versus 22% in those treated with standard articulations (P = .58). No dislocations occurred in THAs with retained acetabular components and dual-mobility constructs versus a 5-year cumulative probability of dislocation of 25% in those with revised acetabular components and standard articulations (P = .24).


      Revision THAs for aseptically failed MoM hip resurfacings yielded a 5-year survivorship free of re-revision of 89%. The main reason for failure was dislocation, which was reduced, but not statistically significantly, when a dual-mobility construct was used, especially if the acetabular component was retained.

      Level of Evidence



      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to The Journal of Arthroplasty
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • McMinn D.
        • Treacy R.
        • Lin K.
        • Pynsent P.
        Metal on metal surface replacement of the hip. Experience of the McMinn prothesis.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 329: S89-S98
        • Mont M.A.
        • Seyler T.M.
        • Ragland P.S.
        • Starr R.
        • Erhart J.
        • Bhave A.
        Gait analysis of patients with resurfacing hip arthroplasty compared with hip osteoarthritis and standard total hip arthroplasty.
        J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22: 100-108
        • Gaillard M.D.
        • Gross T.P.
        Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in patients younger than 50 years: a retrospective analysis : 1285 cases, 12-year survivorship.
        J Orthop Surg Res. 2017; 12: 79-80
        • Mont M.A.
        • Ragland P.S.
        • Etienne G.
        • Seyler T.M.
        • Schmalzried T.P.
        Hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
        J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006; 14: 454-463
        • Hunter T.J.A.
        • Moores T.S.
        • Morley D.
        • Manoharan G.
        • Collier S.G.
        • Shaylor P.J.
        10-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing: a non-designer case series.
        Hip Int. 2018; 28: 50-52
        • Suraci A.B.
        • Bhullar R.S.
        • Dobransky J.S.
        • Beaulé P.E.
        Hueter anterior approach for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: 555 cases at a minimum five-year follow-up.
        J Arthroplasty. 2021; 36: 3200-3208
        • Glyn-Jones S.
        • Pandit H.
        • Kwon Y.M.
        • Doll H.
        • Gill H.S.
        • Murray D.W.
        Risk factors for inflammatory pseudotumour formation following hip resurfacing.
        J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91: 1566-1574
        • Shimmin A.J.
        • Bare J.
        • Back D.L.
        Complications associated with hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
        Orthop Clin North Am. 2005; 36 (ix): 187-193
        • Amstutz H.C.
        • Le Duff M.J.
        Eleven years of experience with metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing: a review of 1000 conserve plus.
        J Arthroplasty. 2008; 23: 36-43
        • Marker D.R.
        • Seyler T.M.
        • Jinnah R.H.
        • Delanois R.E.
        • Ulrich S.D.
        • Mont M.A.
        Femoral neck fractures after metal-on-metal total hip resurfacing: a prospective cohort study.
        J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22: 66-71
        • Steffen R.T.
        • Foguet P.R.
        • Krikler S.J.
        • Gundle R.
        • Beard D.J.
        • Murray D.W.
        Femoral neck fractures after hip resurfacing.
        J Arthroplasty. 2009; 24: 614-619
        • Marshall D.A.
        • Pykerman K.
        • Werle J.
        • Lorenzetti D.
        • Wasylak T.
        • Noseworthy T.
        • et al.
        Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472: 2217-2230
      1. Australian orthopaedic association national joint replacement registry annual report. AOA, Adelaide2009: 20-44
        • Haynes J.A.
        • Stambough J.B.
        • Barrack R.L.
        • Nam D.
        Conversion of a failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty: pearls and pitfalls.
        Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2016; 9: 103-111
        • Sandiford N.A.
        • Muirhead-Allwood S.K.
        • Skinner J.A.
        Revision of failed hip resurfacing to total hip arthroplasty rapidly relieves pain and improves function in the early post operative period.
        J Orthop Surg Res. 2010; 29: 5-88
        • Coutandin M.
        • Afghanyar Y.
        • Drees P.
        • Dargel J.
        • Rehbein P.
        • Kutzner K.P.
        Can hip resurfacing be safely revised with short-stem total hip arthroplasty? A case series of six patients.
        J Orthop. 2021; 24: 274-279
        • Bouveau V.
        • Haen T.X.
        • Poupon J.
        • Nich C.
        Outcomes after revision of metal on metal hip resurfacing to total arthroplasty using the direct anterior approach.
        Int Orthop. 2018; 42: 2543-2548
        • Amstutz H.C.
        • Le Duff M.
        What are the results of revised hip resurfacing arthroplasties?.
        Bone Joint J. 2020; 102-B: 1289-1296
        • Chalmers B.P.
        • Perry K.I.
        • Taunton M.J.
        • Mabry T.M.
        • Abdel M.P.
        Diagnosis of adverse local tissue reactions following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty.
        Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2016; 9: 67-74
        • Harris W.H.
        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 Am. 1969; 51: 737-755
        • DeLee J.G.
        • Charnley J.
        Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976; 26: 20-32
        • Gruen T.A.
        • McNeice G.M.
        • Amstutz H.C.
        “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979; 141: 17-27
        • Johnston R.C.
        • Fitzgerald Jr., R.H.
        • Harris W.H.
        • Poss R.
        • Müller M.E.
        • Sledge C.B.
        Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. A standard system of terminology for reporting results.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990; 72: 161-168
        • Fowler J.L.
        • Gie G.A.
        • Lee A.J.
        • Ling R.S.
        Experience with the Exeter total hip replacement since 1970.
        Orthop Clin North Am. 1988; 19: 477-489
        • Brooker A.F.
        • Bowerman J.W.
        • Robinson R.A.
        • Riley Jr., L.H.
        Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973; 55: 1629-1632
        • Loftus M.
        • Ma Y.
        • Ghelman B.
        Acetabular version measurement in total hip arthroplasty: the impact of inclination and the value of multi-planar CT reformation.
        HSS J. 2015; 11: 65-70
        • Woo R.Y.
        • Morrey B.F.
        Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64: 1295-1306
        • Bland J.M.
        • Altman D.G.
        Survival probabilities (the Kaplan-Meier method).
        BMJ. 1998; 317: 1572-1580
        • Wong J.M.
        • Liu Y.L.
        • Graves S.
        • de Steiger R.
        What is the rerevision rate after revising a hip resurfacing arthroplasty? Analysis from the AOANJRR.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 473: 3458-3464
        • Matharu G.S.
        • Pandit H.G.
        • Murray D.W.
        Poor survivorship and frequent complications at a median of 10 Years after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing revision.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 304-314
        • Su E.P.
        • Su S.L.
        Surface replacement conversion: results depend upon reason for revision.
        Bone Joint J. 2013; 95-B: 88-91
        • Munro J.T.
        • Masri B.A.
        • Duncan C.P.
        • Garbuz D.S.
        High complication rate after revision of large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472: 523-528
        • Snir N.
        • Park B.K.
        • Garofolo G.
        • Marwin S.E.
        Revision of failed hip resurfacing and large metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty using dual-mobility components.
        Orthopedics. 2015; 38: 369-374
        • Blevins J.L.
        • Shen T.S.
        • Morgenstern R.
        • DeNova T.A.
        • Su E.P.
        Conversion of hip resurfacing with retention of monoblock Acetabular shell using dual-mobility components.
        J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34: 2037-2044
        • Ball S.T.
        • Le Duff M.J.
        • Amstutz H.C.
        Early results of conversion of a failed femoral component in hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89: 735-741