Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40709169›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2025

Risk factors for revision of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty. A single-center study with a median 13-year follow-up.

Alexander Oxblom, Håkan Hedlund, Li Felländer-Tsai, Ola Rolfson, Harald Brismar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Alexander OxblomDivison of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, H9 Klinisk vetenskap, intervention och teknik, H9 CLINTEC Ortopedi och bioteknologi, 141 52 Huddinge, Sweden.
Håkan HedlundDivison of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, H9 Klinisk vetenskap, intervention och teknik, H9 CLINTEC Ortopedi och bioteknologi, 141 52 Huddinge, Sweden.
Li Felländer-TsaiDivison of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, H9 Klinisk vetenskap, intervention och teknik, H9 CLINTEC Ortopedi och bioteknologi, 141 52 Huddinge, Sweden.
Ola RolfsonDepartment of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Göteborgsvägen 31, R-huset, plan 7, 431 80 Mölndal, Sweden.
Harald BrismarDivison of Orthopaedics and Biotechnology, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institutet, H9 Klinisk vetenskap, intervention och teknik, H9 CLINTEC Ortopedi och bioteknologi, 141 52 Huddinge, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Consensus is lacking regarding follow-up after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR). This study examines risk factors for revision and evaluates the need for sequential follow-up. Patients and methods: 288 consecutive patients operated on with a unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) 2001-2014, having at least one x-ray and one metal ion sampling, were followed until 2022. Hazard ratios (HR) of revision were calculated for sex, age, femoral component head size, implant positioning, serum cobalt (sCo), and serum chrome (sCr) concentrations. The relative risk (RR) of revision if risk factors were present was calculated. Radiologic changes in component positioning were analyzed in 288 patients, and metal ion changes in 147 patients. Results: The median follow-up was 13 years. Factors associated with revision were sCo and/or sCr >5 μg/l at first follow-up, a post-operative anteversion <5 or >25°, and femoral head component size <50 mm. Patients with one or more risk factors at first follow-up had a RR of 10 (95 % CI 2.5-42) to be revised compared to those without risk factors. A ≥10° change in the stem shaft angle was associated with an increased OR of revision (OR 14, 95 % CI 4.4-43). A change in sCo and/or sCr from ≤5 to >5 μg/l between follow-ups was associated with an increased risk of revision (OR 8.5, 95 % CI 1.3-55). Conclusions: Patients with risk factors at first follow-up, a change from serum metal ions ≤5 to >5 μg/l, and a ≥10° change in the stem shaft angle at sequential follow-ups warrant continuous follow-up even if asymptomatic.

Indexed as

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacingRevision hip arthroplastyTotal hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID40709169
PMCPMC12284790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.