Hip Resurfacing using the Trochanteric Flip Osteotomy

Kıllampallı, Vijay V.; Hayes, Andrew; Parsons, Nicholas R.; Costa, Matthew L.; Prakash, Udai

doi:10.1177/112070000901900209

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The studies included one randomised, clinical trial, 27 prospective case series and one retrospective case series. [9][10][11][22][23][24][25][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55] The mean follow-up ranged from 0.6 to 10.5 years. The highest reported loss to follow-up was 8.3% 50 and 11 studies reported no loss to follow-up.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The highest reported loss to follow-up was 8.3% 50 and 11 studies reported no loss to follow-up. 11,22,25,34,35,42,48,49,[52][53][54] The survival of the implant ranged between 84% and 100% (Fig. 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 13 of 17 studies with a follow-up of between three and 11 years, the survival rate was compliant with the NICE benchmark. [9][10][11]35,[37][38][39]43,44,46,47,49,54 These 13 studies used either the BHR implant (eight), the Conserve Plus (two), the Durom (one), the Cormet 2000 (one) or both the McMinn and the BHR implants (one). The four studies not compliant with this benchmark, but with follow-up of more than three years, used either the ASR device (two), the BHR (one) or the second-generation McMinn device 11,33,34,40 (Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Survival of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Weegen

Hoekstra

Sijbesma

et al. 2011

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We systematically reviewed the peer-reviewed literature to relate the survival of hybrid metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty devices to a National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) benchmark for choosing a primary total hip replacement, which is a survival rate of 90% at a follow-up of ten years. A total of 29 articles (10 621 resurfaced hips) met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up ranged from 0.6 to 10.5 years and the survival of the implant ranged from 84% to 100%. Of the 10 621 hips, 370 were revised (3.5%), with aseptic loosening as the most frequent mode of failure. None of the hip resurfacing arthroplasty implants used to date met the full ten-year NICE benchmark of survival. A total of 13 studies showed satisfactory survival compared with the three-year NICE benchmark.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Survival of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty

Weegen

Hoekstra

Sijbesma

et al. 2011

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In patients of greater than 60 years of age, we suggest that an alternative, such as the posterior or modified anterolateral approach 4 should be used. Killampalli et al 2 reported four patients (4%) with pain due to the prominence of the screw heads in healed osteotomies that later required screw removal. Ganz et al 1 and Khan et al 4 did not comment on this complication in their papers.…”

Section: Audit-induced Change Reduces Complications Of the Ganz Nortomentioning

confidence: 99%

Audit-induced change reduces complications of the Ganz trochanteric flip approach

Guyver

Cattell

Reddy

et al. 2010

annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION The Ganz trochanteric flip approach aims to avoid the potential risk of avascular necrosis in hip conserving surgery and may reduce the risk of femoral neck fractures, neck thinning and femoral head implant migration in hip resurfacing. Our initial audit revealed the complications of non-union and trochanteric screw irritation to be associated with this approach. We, therefore, modified our selection criteria and re-audited our results. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The initial audit (IA) ran between January 2003 and November 2007 after which an age limit of 50 years was recommended. The re-audit (RA) ran between November 2007 and December 2008 where one of the senior authors stopped using the approach in the over 50 year age group whilst the other senior author continued on selected patients over 50 years. RESULTS There were 545 hips in the IA and 152 hips in the RA group. The incidence of non-union decreased in the RA after the change of selection criteria (6.2% [IA] vs 1.3% [RA]). In both audit groups, the incidence of non-union increased with age, and in the RA no non-unions were observed under the age of 50 years. The incidence of screw irritation and the necessity for removal remained relatively unchanged (20.7% [IA] vs 28.3% [RA]) with a combined incidence of 22.4%. CONCLUSIONS The trochanteric flip approach to the hip can be used safely with an acceptable complication rate in young adult impingement and resurfacing surgery. Caution must, however, be exercised in patients over 50 years of age as they have a higher incidence of trochanteric non-union. In addition, all patients should be consented for the possibility of screw removal as a second procedure.

show abstract

“…Metal on metal resurfacing (12,13,14,15,16,17,18) remains topical, and the associated issues relating to biomechanics (19,20) and blood supply (21). Advances in the early and late management of developmental dysplasia have been addressed (22,23,24,25,26), and new methods of imaging for this condition and femoro-acetabular impingement have been evaluated (27,28).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%