Skip to main content

Advertisement

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]