ArticleJournal of orthopaedic translation2020
Hip resurfacing arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: Implant-specific outcomes and risk factors for failure.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Total hip arthroplasty and perioperative management of a patient with hip osteonecrosis secondary to hypopituitarism due to Sheehan syndrome: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitude, practice, and influencing factors among patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Microstructural and transcriptomic characterization of trabecular bone in idiopathic osteonecrosis of the femoral head.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Long-term results of hemi-resurfacing and metal-on-metal hip resurfacing for osteonecrosis of the femoral head.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2024Article
- Review
- Is there still an indication for the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing in femoral head osteonecrosis?International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- A Pilot Experiment to Measure the Initial Mechanical Stability of the Femoral Head Implant in a Cadaveric Model of Osteonecrosis of Femoral Head Involving up to 50% of the Remaining Femoral Head.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Hip Preservation or Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Retrospective Case-Control Study of Factors Influencing Arthroplasty Decision-Making for Patients with Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head in China.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty after Failure of Tantalum Rod Insertion in Patients with Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head.Hip & pelvis · 2022Article
- Hip Resurfacing vs Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Younger than 35 Years: A Comparison of Revision Rates and Patient-Reported Outcomes.Arthroplasty today · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) may be a suitable option for treating osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). However, concerns regarding the extent of osteonecrosis, amount of defect under the prosthesis, and implant-related complications remain. This study aimed to report implant-specific outcomes and risk factors for failure of HRA in ONFH.
methodsA total of 202 HRAs (166 patients) performed by a single surgeon were investigated. The stage, size, and location of ONFH were evaluated using preoperative radiographs and magnetic resonance images. Clinical, radiographic results, and serum metal concentrations of articular surface replacement (ASR) and non-ASR devices were compared. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the contributors of failures. The mean follow-up duration was 10.6 years.
resultsTwenty-six hips (12.9%) were operated with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR), 99 (49.0%) with ASR, and 77 (38.1%) with Conserve Plus. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 52.1 to 93.2 at the final follow-up (P < 0.001). Revision-free survivorships of non-ASR and ASR implants were 99.0% and 82.4%, respectively (P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the use of ASR prosthesis, greater combined necrotic angle, and smaller head size were associated with revision surgery. A large combined necrotic angle was the only independent risk factor for mechanical failure at the femoral side (P = 0.029).
conclusionHRA for ONFH using BHR and Conserve Plus implants demonstrated favourable clinical outcomes with high revision-free survival rates at 10 years. However, care should be taken for large necrotic lesions that can lead to femoral neck fracture or aseptic femoral loosening. THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE: This study suggests HRA performed for appropriately selected patients with ONFH can show excellent long-term clinical results. Therefore, HRA should remain as one of the treatment options for ONFH, and further development of HRA implants should be continued.
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.