Birmingham hip resurfacing at a mean of ten years
Results from an independent centre
G. Coulter, MBChB, FRACS, Orthopaedic Fellow1; D. A. Young, MBBS, FRACS, FAOrthA, Orthopaedic Surgeon1; R. E. Dalziel, MBBS, FRACS, FAOrthA, Orthopaedic Surgeon1; and A. J. Shimmin, MBBS, FRACS, FAOrthA, Orthopaedic Surgeon1
+ Author Affiliations
Correspondence should be sent to Mr A. J. Shimmin; e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
We report the findings of an independent review of 230 consecutive Birmingham hip resurfacings (BHRs) in 213 patients (230 hips) at a mean follow-up of 10.4 years (9.6 to 11.7).
A total of 11 hips underwent revision; six patients (six hips) died from unrelated causes; and 13 patients (16 hips) were lost to follow-up. The survival rate for the whole cohort was 94.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.1 to 96.9).
The survival rate in women was 89.1% (95% CI 79.2 to 94.4) and in men was 97.5% (95% CI 92.4 to 99.2).
Women were 1.4 times more likely to suffer failure than men.
For each millimetre increase in component size there was a 19% lower chance of a failure. The mean Oxford hip score was 45.0 (median 47.0, 28 to 48); mean University of California, Los Angeles activity score was 7.4 (median 8.0, 3 to 9); mean patient satisfaction score was 1.4 (median 1.0, 0 to 9).
A total of eight hips had lysis in the femoral neck and two hips had acetabular lysis. One hip had progressive radiological changes around the peg of the femoral component. There was no evidence of progressive neck narrowing between five and ten years.
Our results confirm that BHR provides good functional outcome and durability for men, at a mean follow-up of ten years. We are now reluctant to undertake hip resurfacing in women with this implant.
The authors wish to thank Professor A. Esterman and Dr S. Pearce for statistical analysis of the study data, and A. Pearce for assistance with the preparation of the manuscript.
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
Received August 19, 2011.
Accepted November 1, 2011.
- Smith & Nephew Birmingham hip resurfacing – THE PREVALENCE OF FAILURE (earlsview.com)
- Early Clinical Experience With the Use of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System | Orthopedics (earlsview.com)
- Patients with metal-on-metal hips being contacted after UK officials issue alert | Orthopedics Today (earlsview.com)
- Despite the Reasons AGAINST – FDA Advisory Panel Recommends Conditional Approval of Smith & Nephew’s BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing Technology (earlsview.com)
- SUMMARY OF SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS DATA PREMARKET APPROVAL APPLICATION P040033 SMITH & NEPHEW BHR BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING SYSTEMf (earlsview.com)
- FDA Pre Market Approval (PMA) of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) System – P040033 (earlsview.com)
- 26% Failure in Female Smith & Nephew BHR’s – The ten-year survival of the Birmingham… [J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012] – PubMed – NCBI (earlsview.com)
- Smith & Nephew – BHR PMA – FIRST OF A KIND PMA – WHO PULLED WHAT STRINGS???? (earlsview.com)
- What’s new in hip op surgery | Arthritis Research UK (earlsview.com)
- GOOD NEWS – Smith and Nephew sees a decline Birmingham hip implant business (earlsview.com)