Skip to main content

Table 9 Literature review

From: Reducing the failure rate of hip resurfacing in dysplasia patients: a retrospective analysis of 363 cases

Study

Procedure

Prosthesis

Date range

Diagnosis

Patient cohort

Avg FU (Yrs)

Survivorship

Hips

Female

FU

Rate

Amstutz et al.

HRA

Conserve Plus

1996–2006

Dysplasia

103

78 %

4.8

8

92 %

McBryde et al.

HRA

Birmingham

1997–2004

Dysplasia

96

81 %

4.4

5

97 %

Naal et al.

HRA

Birmingham

2002–2005

Dysplasia

32

56 %

3.6

5

94 %

Pagnano et al.

THA

Charnley THA

1969–1980

Dysplasia

Crowe 2

145

82 %

14

7

12

73 %

56 %

Numair et al.

THA

Charnley THA

1965–1987

Dysplasia Crowe 1–3

136

63 %

--

10

98 %

Linde et al.

THA

Charnley THA

--

Dysplasia

129

--

--

5

10

93 %

89 %

Millis et al.

Bernese Osteotomy

--

1991–1998

Dysplasia

135

86 %

9

5

10

96 %

84 %

Adelani et al.

Revision THA

-Varies-

1996–2006

<55 years old

103

66 %

6.7

6.7

69 %

Current Study Group 1

HRA

Corin Hybrid, Biomet ReCap™ Hybrid

2001–2008

Dysplasia

121

71 %

6.4

7

12

90 %

86 %

Current Study Group 2

HRA

Biomet ReCap™ Uncemented

2008–2013

Dysplasia

242

74 %

2.6

7

99 %

  1. Literature comparison of our Group 1 and Group 2 results with results from Amstutz [45], McBryde [46], Naal [47], Pagnano [48], Numair [33], Linde [34], Millis [49], and Adelani [50]