Study finds no evidence that hip resurfacing leads to better outcomes than total hip arthroplasty at one year
Published date : 05 May 2012
Article date : 05 May 2012
The BMJ continues to demonstrate its interest in metal on metal hip replacements by publishing a study from Costa et al of Warwick University (1). 126 patients thought suitable for hip resurfacing were randomised either to hip resurfacing or total hip arthroplasty. Outcomes at one year measured by Harris hip score and Oxford hip score were not significantly different between the groups. However, this was a pragmatic study comprising a number of different implants and surgeons and the confidence intervals for this result were wide. It has become clear that not all hip resurfacing devices are the same.
Other authors have noticed a greater improvement in quality of life scores (SF36) and WOMAC scores in patients who have had resurfacing compared to total hip replacement (2,3).
(1) Costa ML, Achten J, Parsons NR, Edlin RP, Foguet P, Prakash U, Griffin DR; Young Adult Hip Arthroplasty team. Total hip arthroplasty versus resurfacing arthroplasty in the treatment of patients with arthritis of the hip joint: single centre, parallel group, assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2012 Apr 19;344:e2147. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2147.
(2) The Alberta Hip Improvement Project. Functional Outcomes for 2 Years Comparing Hip Resurfacing and Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012 May;27(5):750-757.e2. Epub 2012 Jan 28.
(3) Lingard EA, Muthumayandi K, Holland JP. Comparison of patient-reported outcomes between hip resurfacing and total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Dec;91(12):1550-4.
