Hip Resurfacing through an Anterolateral Approach by Dr. Jacobs
Link
Surgical Description and Early Review
Michael A. Jacobs, MD1,
Robin N. Goytia, MD1 and Tarun Bhargava,
MD1
1 5601 Loch Raven Boulevard,
Russell Morgan Building, Suite 402, Baltimore, MD 21239. E-mail
address for M.A. Jacobs:
michaelaaron@hotmail.com
Background: Recently, metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has enjoyed a resurgence as an alternative to hip arthroplasty in properly selected patients. The purpose of the present study was to report the early results of hip resurfacing through an anterolateral approach and to describe the technique with modifications that have been made as experience with the procedure has increased… …Results: After a mean duration of follow-up of thirty-eight months, the mean Harris hip score was 99 points. Fifty-five hips were in patients with normal function scores, and two were in patients who reported mild dysfunction. Fifty hips had no pain, five had slight pain, one had mild pain, and one had moderate pain. Three hips had a failure of resurfacing and required revision. Two failures were secondary to femoral neck fractures, and one was the result of debonding of the surface coating of the acetabular component. Conclusions: The early results associated with a new generation of hip resurfacing devices are promising. The anterolateral approach affords the surgeon excellent exposure with the advantage of increased hip stability and potentially improved vascular supply of the femoral head as compared with the posterior approach.
Background: Recently, metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has enjoyed a resurgence as an alternative to hip arthroplasty in properly selected patients. The purpose of the present study was to report the early results of hip resurfacing through an anterolateral approach and to describe the technique with modifications that have been made as experience with the procedure has increased… …Results: After a mean duration of follow-up of thirty-eight months, the mean Harris hip score was 99 points. Fifty-five hips were in patients with normal function scores, and two were in patients who reported mild dysfunction. Fifty hips had no pain, five had slight pain, one had mild pain, and one had moderate pain. Three hips had a failure of resurfacing and required revision. Two failures were secondary to femoral neck fractures, and one was the result of debonding of the surface coating of the acetabular component. Conclusions: The early results associated with a new generation of hip resurfacing devices are promising. The anterolateral approach affords the surgeon excellent exposure with the advantage of increased hip stability and potentially improved vascular supply of the femoral head as compared with the posterior approach.