• Marloes W J L Schmitz, René P H Veth, and B Willem Schreurs.
• Universitair Medisch Centrum St Radboud, afd. Orthopedie, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
• Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2011 Jan 1; 155 (38): A3186.

AbstractHip resurfacing arthroplasty was introduced as an alternative to the conventional total hip arthroplasty which had shown suboptimal results in younger patients. Application of the resurfacing technique in younger patients has increased over the last few years. To date, no randomized controlled trials with a minimum follow-up span of 10 years comparing hip resurfacing to conventional hip replacement have been conducted in patients under 55 years of age. Australian and English hip registries demonstrate high revision rates after 5 years for some brands of resurfacing implants. In addition to these disappointing revision rates, the complication of aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis caused by metal particles evoking a local tissue reaction has been increasingly reported. The resurfacing procedure recently received some negative media attention in the Netherlands, leading to confusion among patients. In order to ease patient doubts, it is important to correctly inform them as to the type of implant used, for example, by means of the website or an information card.

18 keywords...

hide…