The American journal of orthopedics
-
Metal-on-metal (MOM) hip resurfacing has become an increasingly popular treatment for young, active patients with degenerative disease of the hip, as bearing surfaces with better wear properties are now available. One proposed advantage of resurfacing is its ability to be successfully revised to total hip arthroplasty (THA). In addition, radiographic parameters that may predict failure in hip resurfacing have yet to be clearly defined. ⋯ Conversion of aseptic failure of hip resurfacing to conventional THA leads to clinical outcomes similar to those of patients who undergo uncomplicated hip resurfacing. The orientation of the femur and the components placed play a large role in implant survival in hip resurfacing. More work needs to be done to further elucidate these radiographic parameters.
-
Comparative Study
Does surgeon volume for total hip arthroplasty affect outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture?
We conducted a study to compare complication rates in patients treated with hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture by surgeons with variable experience in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and revision THA. A cohort of Medicare beneficiaries (N = 115,352) was identified from Medicare part A claims from 1994 and 1995. All patients had undergone hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture. ⋯ Revision surgery rates, however, were statistically higher for the high-volume group than for the no-volume group at 90 days (0.9% vs 0.7%), 1 year (3.3% vs 2.9%), and 5 years (8.4% vs 7.7%). There were no differences in rates of venous thromboembolism or deep infection between the groups. Surgical experience in primary and revision THA has a significant effect on patient outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture.