An Initial Experience with Hip Resurfacing Versus Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background

Hip resurfacing is an alternative to total hip arthroplasty.

Questions/Purpose

We aimed to compare an experienced hip surgeon’s initial clinical results of hip resurfacing with a new cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

The first 55 consecutive hip resurfacing arthroplasties were compared to 100 consecutive cementless THAs using a cylindrical tapered femoral stem. The learning curve between the two procedures was compared utilizing the incidence of reoperation, complications, Harris Hip Scores (HHS), and implant survivorship.

Results

The reoperation rate was significantly higher (p = 0.019) for hip resurfacing (14.5%) versus THA (4%). The overall complication rate between the two groups was not significantly different (p = 0.398). Preoperative HHS were similar between the two groups (p = 0.2). The final mean HHS was similar in both the resurfacing and THA groups (96 vs. 98.3, respectively, p < 0.65). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with an endpoint of reoperation suggests complications occurred earlier in the resurfacing group versus the THA group (log-rank test, p = 0.007).

Conclusions

In comparison to our initial experience with a cementless THA stem, operative complications occur earlier and more often after hip resurfacing during the learning period. The clinical outcomes in both groups however are similar at 5 year follow-up.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11420-013-9333-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.