ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2011
High revision rate at 5 years after hip resurfacing with the Durom implant.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Hip resurfacing: a systematic review of literature.International orthopaedics · 2012Pooled it
- Mid-term clinical and radiographic outcome of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing through an anterolateral approach.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2023Article
- Repeated metal ion measurements and long-term outcome of Durom/MMC total hip arthroplasty.Acta orthopaedica · 2022Article
- Comparison of the long-term cause of failure and survivorship of four hundred and twenty seven metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties: resurfacing versus large head total hip arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Improving the Quality of Life of Patients With Medical Devices by a Timely Analysis of Adverse Events.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Article
- Explant analysis of the Biomet Magnum/ReCap metal-on-metal hip joint.Bone & joint research · 2017Article
- Current indications for hip resurfacing arthroplasty in 2016.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2016Article
- What are the risks accompanying the reduced wear benefit of low-clearance hip resurfacing?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2012Article
- Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: an analysis of safety and revision rates.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background/rationaleThere is growing evidence that different resurfacing implants are associated with variable survival and revision rates. A registry analysis indicated the Durom resurfacing implant had high revision rates at 5 years, whereas three original studies reported low revision rates at short-term followups. Thus, the revision rates appear controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore assessed (1) the survivorship including differences between women and men at a mean of 5 years after resurfacing with the Durom implant, and (2) clinical scores and radiographic parameters. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe prospectively followed all 100 Durom hip resurfacings implanted in 91 patients (25 women and 66 men; mean age, 52 years) between 2003 and 2004. Survivorship analysis was performed with pending revision or revision for any reason as the endpoint. The minimum followup was 47 months (mean, 60 months; range, 47-72 months).
resultsAt a mean of 5 years, 11 hips were revised for various reasons. Cumulative survival was 88.2% for all patients and 81.5% for women. The mean Oxford (OHS) and Harris hip (HHS) scores were 14.6 and 94.7, respectively. The mean UCLA activity level was 7.9. Sclerotic changes around the short femoral stem (pedestal sign) were detected in 40% of the hips. We observed considerable femoral neck thinning with component-to-neck ratios of 0.85 preoperatively and 0.82 at 5 years.
conclusionsOur study highlights a high revision rate 5 years after hip resurfacing with the Durom implant. This observation underlines previous findings from registry data and suggests that revision rates increase with time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.