Obtained by Freelance Patient Advocate Volunteer Vicky Marlow 8/22/08 What is the NCP – Neck Capsule Preservation – Approach in Hip Resurfacing? Dr. Su’s Article The NCP approach, at least the way that we mean it, is a different way to incise the capsule in order to gain access to the hip joint. Usually with…
Continue reading →BHR 10 years of Data The first BHR was implanted in July 1997 and it is unchanged until present day. 96.1% survivorship overall McMinn 99.8% at 8 years Treacy 99% at minimum 5 years Shimmin et al 99.14% at 3 years Oswestry Cohort, FDA approval Data 2006 98.7% at 4 years U.S. Statistics as…
Continue reading →Dr. Kurtz had an article online that had concerns about the head neck rations of hip resurfacing compared to total hip replacement. We wanted to provide potential hip resurfacing patients with opinions of other top resurfacing surgeons to explain their views. Hi Vicky, Thanks for the mail. I read Dr. Kurtz thoughts on hip resurfacing… Continue reading →
by Dr. Scott Rubinstein August 25, 2007 Hi All, Here we are debating a question that has no clear cut answer. All the anticoagulents have side effects. Bleeding and bruising are the most common ones. There are advantages and disadvantages to each and none is the clear cut winner. As far as effectiveness they all… Continue reading →
Published on July 2, 2013 Derek McMinn presents a talk on the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) and the alternative options for hip joint replacement surgery. Starting with the development of the BHR, Mr McMinn goes on to discuss survivorship rates and revisions, cancer, metal ions, the DePuy ASR disaster, Delta Ceramic and new development Polymix.… Continue reading →
BHR – Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System by Smith & Nephew Dr.Pritchett Explains Metal Free Cementless Hip Resurfacing Device 2014 (Synovo Preserve) Corin Cormet Hip Resurfacing Device withdrawn from US Market 2013 Wright Medical Conserve Plus Hip Resurfacing Device withdrawn from US Market 2014 Continue reading →
What are the differences between the posterior and anterior surgical approaches? Recovery is quicker with the posterior approach because no important muscle groups are sectioned. The posterior approach is also well-suited for patients who are large, well muscled or who require special techniques to implant the hip resurfacing socket. To improve stability and reduce the… Continue reading →