2015BHR used for 18 years in Clinical Use
Mid-term Results of Hip Resurfacing in a Large US Series with Technique and Imaging Recommendations by Dr. Brooks 2015 – 1333 Hip Resurfacing patients with Overall survivorship at 99.2%, at 2 to 5.7 years follow up. Aseptic survivorship in males under the age of 50 was 100%.
Dr. Gross Informed Consent Form with Current Statistics 2014 – The first 1000 Biomet uncemented HRA were reported in the Journal of Arthroplasty achieving an overall 6-year survivorship of 98% (99% for men and 96% for women) Not all complications lead to failure.
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 procedure.”
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 fearing metallosis.
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 percent survival.
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.