Experienced Hip Resurfacing Surgeons Respond to Negative Media Information About Hip Resurfacing Updated 10/14/2014
Dr. Rogerson Discusses Metal on Metal Bearings and
Hip Resurfacing 2014 – For the physiologically young and
very active individuals with good bone density, I still
firmly believe that the Smith & Nephew Birmingham hip
resurfacing is a superior choice and continue to use it in
this demographic population with excellent results.
Mr. Treacy, co-designer BHR, Comments on Negative UK
Telegraph Article 2013 – Your article does not mention the
success of Birmingham Hip Resurfacing – the most widely used
procedure, and therefore the most relevant to patients.
Hip Resurfacing Still an Excellent Option by Dr. Raimund
Voelker 2013 – Out of my experience I have 3 simple
recommendations to be successful with hip resurfacing. They
count for patients and surgeons as well.
Dr. Brooks Explains why Hip Resurfacing Is Still an
Excellent Compared to Metal on Metal Total Hip Replacement 2013
– with hip resurfacingthere is no modularity, no Morse
taper, no concerns about fretting and corrosion. It’s just
the bearing. Here, bigger is better.
Hip Resurfacing for Women by Dr. Gross 2013 – There has
been extensive recent negative media attention focused on
metal bearing total hips, hip resurfacing and particularly
hip resurfacing in women. Many hip surgeons feel that this
operation should not be offered to women. I disagree.
Results of Hip Resurfacing at the Cleveland Clinic by Dr.
Brooks December 2012 – “Overall, the BHR in our center
has a greater than 99% success rate at up to 6 years
follow-up. These kinds of results have already been seen by
experienced hip surgeons in other centers around the world,
where the BHR has been available for 15 years.”
- “The overall survival was 95.1% at 13 years.”
- “Survivorship in men was 98.6% at 13 years.”
- “Survivorship in women was 87.9% at 13 years.”
Dr. Gross Explains the Advantages of Hip Resurfacing vs THR Video Interview 2012 – Why Hip Resurfacing is still an excellent choice for hip replacement. 2012 Interview by Patricia Walter.
The Durability of Hip Resurfacing 2012 by Dr. Gross –
Response to Lancet article. “In summary, the conclusions of the Lancet study are based
on a very limited and superficial analysis of THR vs. HRA.
The Lancet study only illustrates that a patient should not
allow an inexperienced hip-resurfacing surgeon to perform
his/ her operation.”
Dr. Su responds to the recent Lancet article 2012 – “The
study by Blom et al. fails to account for the countless
lives that have been returned to one of function and
activity by hip resurfacing, which is why I don’t agree with
the recommendation of denying my patients this alternative
to total hip replacement.”
Mr. McMinn Address Negative Press about Hip Resurfacing 2012 –
“In addition to the MHRA’s guidance, we wish to emphasize
that Mr. McMinn’s results with the BHR show a 97% survival in
men and women of all ages at 14.5 years. Furthermore,
excellent results with the BHR have been documented in
National Joint Registers from around the world.”
New Clinical Results Further Distance the BIRMINGHAM HIP™
Resurfacing System From Failed Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants 2012
– “The study, carried out at the request of the FDA,
followed the progress of the first 400 BHR patients in the
United Kingdom and found that after 10 years, 99% were
either satisfied or extremely satisfied with their BHR
Dr. Amstutz – Hip resurfacing: The metal-on-metal bearing
material is not the problem 2012 – The manufacturing quality
of MoM bearings is excellent nowadays in most designs,
particularly the control of clearance and roundness of the
components, and is certainly sufficient to produce safe and
successful hip arthroplasty devices as long as conservative
guidelines for cup implantation are followed.
Hip Resurfacing is Still an Excellent Choice in 2012 by
Patricia Walter – Patricia discusses why hip resurfacing
is still an excellent option with great outcomes in 2012.
Despite the negative media blitz against hip resurfacing,
patients using the experienced hip resurfacing surgeons have
excellent outcomes and long retention rates.
Polyethylene Hip Resurfacing for Women by Dr. Pritchett 2011
– Hip resurfacing with a polyethylene acetabular component
is a reliable procedure at midterm follow-up. Some of the
concerns that exist – namely metallosis with metal-on-metal
prostheses – can be avoided. The functional results are
comparable to metal-on-metal resurfacing but long-term
follow up is needed to determine if implant survivorship
with polyethylene acetabular components will equal
metal-on-metal prostheses. Polyethylene can be a useful
option in acetabular revision situations or for women
A comparison of modern bearing types by Dr. Thomas Gross
2011 – My opinion is that the advantages of metal on
metal bearings strongly outweigh the potential risks in
virtually all patients. There are only rare situations when
I recommend another bearing type. In older patients (above
65 years) I generally recommend a stemmed large bearing
metal-metal hip replacement. In younger patients I strongly
advocate hip resurfacing.
Survivorship Rates for Hip Resurfacing from National
Registries 2011 – There are six prostheses with over
1,000 observed component years, the ASR, Adept, BHR, Cormet,
Durom and Mitch TRH. At seven years, the BHR has the lowest
cumulative percent revision (5.0%) compared to Cormet
(11.1%), Durom (9.6%) and ASR (13.0%). The BHR is the only
resurfacing prosthesis with a cumulative percent revision at
ten years (6.3%).
Derek McMinn addresses the recent Concerns about Hip
Resurfacing and Metal on Metal (MoM) implants 2010 – Mr.
McMinn discusses his outcomes and the fact that he actually
has had better results in OLDER age groups. In men OVER the
age of 60, at 12 1/2 years a 99% success rate, and men under
the age of 60, have had a 98% success rate. Also women over
the age of 60 have had better results at 97% implant
survival at 12 1/2 years than younger women at a lower
Smith & Nephew Press Conference about the Safety and
Effectiveness of Hip Resurfacing with the BHR Review by
Patricia Walter 2010 – Discussion of positive outcomes of hip
resurfacing by Mr. McMinn, Dr. Su and others.
BHR (Birmingham Hip Resurfacing) Information and History –
10 Years of Data with positive outcomes 2010 – Review of
BHR history from 1997 to 2010.
Hip resurfacing does not have a serious biomechanical
disadvantage – namely a small head-neck ratio discussion by
Dr. Bose, Dr. Su and Dr. Rogerson 2007 – I (Dr. Su) have
read over the material at this website many times. I have
concluded that it was written by someone who has a very
limited experience with resurfacing. In short, it full of
speculation and non-factual conclusions, interspersed with a
few truths. As such, it can appear convincing at first
glance, but when really scrutinized, many of the arguments
don’t hold water.