Results of the First U.S. FDA-Approved Hip Resurfacing Device at 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing (BHR) system is a metal-on-metal hip implant system approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2006. The approval required a multicenter, prospective, post-market-approval study. Our purpose is to report the current results at 10 years of follow-up. METHODS: Between October 2006 and December 2009, 280 primary BHR procedures were performed at 5 sites. Outcome measures included Kaplan-Meier survivorship, reasons for revision, radiographic component stability and osteolysis, Harris hip scores, and metal levels including cobalt and chromium. The mean age at the time of the procedure was 51.3 ± 7.1 years, 74% (206) of 280 BHRs were implanted in male patients, the mean body mass index was 27.8 ± 4.4 kg/m2, and 95% (265) of 280 hips had a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis. The mean follow-up among all 280 hips was 9.0 ± 2.5 years. Prior to 10-year follow-up, 20 hips were revised and 5 patients representing 5 hips had died. Among the remaining 255 hips, 218 (85%) met the minimum follow-up of 10 years. RESULTS: The 10-year survival free from all-cause component revision was 92.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.8% to 96.1%) for all hips and 96.0% (95% CI, 93.1% to 98.9%) among male patients <65 years old at the time of the procedure. Reasons for revision included femoral loosening (n = 5), femoral neck fracture (n = 3), pseudotumor (n = 3), osteolysis (n = 2), and acetabular loosening (n = 1), as well as 6 revisions for a combination of pain, noise, or metal levels. Among unrevised hips, the median Harris hip score improved from preoperatively (59) to 1 year postoperatively (99; p < 0.001) and remained stable through 10 years postoperatively (99; p = 0.08). Radiographically, 5% (10) of 218 unrevised hips had osteolysis with no component migration. Median metal levels had increased at 1 year postoperatively (cobalt: from 0.12 ppb preoperatively to 1.5 ppb at 1 year postoperatively, p < 0.001; chromium: from 0.6 ppb preoperatively to 1.7 ppb at 1 year postoperatively, p < 0.001), then remained stable through 5 years before slightly decreasing at 10 years postoperatively (cobalt: 1.3 ppb, p < 0.001; chromium: 1.4 ppb, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective, multicenter, post-market-approval study demonstrated that the BHR implant system is safe and effective through 10 years of follow-up, particularly among young male patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Five year results of the first US FDA-approved hip resurfacing device.

A prospective, multi-center postmarket approval study has been ongoing since May 2006 to assess safety and efficacy of the first US FDA approved hip resurfacing implant. 265 patients have been enrolled at five study sites. The average age of the patients is 51.3 years. There have been 7 revisions (2.4%) in the cohort to date. K-M survival curves for the cohort are 97.6% at 5 years. There is a trend toward a gender difference in implant survivorship, with 98.6% of men and 94.7% of women free from revision. Metal ion analysis revealed median cobalt and chromium levels of 1.5 ppb and 1.7 ppb at 1 year. In this prospective US study, the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing implant is demonstrating results comparable to those in the literature.

The value of patient-matched instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty.

The purpose of the current prospective, randomized study was to compare the value of a new mechanically aligned patient-matched instrument system for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) (Visionaire; Smith & Nephew, Inc, Memphis, Tenn) (VIS) to that of standard TKA surgical instrumentation (STD). Twenty-nine primary TKA patients were enrolled and completed surgery (15 VIS and 14 STD). Postoperatively, mechanical alignment was significantly closer to neutral zero in the VIS group (1.7° vs 2.8°; P = .03). Furthermore, the VIS group demonstrated significant reductions in duration of hospital stay, operative time, incision length, and number of used instrument trays (P < .05). Although additional research is underway to confirm these preliminary results, this evidence suggests that patient-matched instrumentation may support repeatable improvements in surgical accuracy and hospital efficiency.