Frank Shorter Runs with Resurfacing

[Canadian-Ice]

Hi Folks,

I thought this article might be interesting for all those folks making choices about the parameters of their running with hip resurfacing. So I've posted this article on 66 year old great Olympian Frank Shorter who had his hip resurfaced in 2009.

For a variety of reasons, he's choosing not to race anymore. But he still runs 45-60 minutes a day at 75% and has an impressive overall fitness program.

http://articles.latimes.com/2014/apr/11/health/la-he-5q-frank-shorter-20140411

Hope it's interesting.

[johnd_emd]

Seems like a sensible guy.  I'm kinda at that stage now after this recent crash.  I'm 54 and have still been training like I was in my 20's and racing PRO 1-2 RACES.  You just come to that point in time where it's not about you any more.  I have several lovely kids to raise.  I'm blessed I got my hip to keep me mobile and it's a more sensible, balanced way to look at life.  Good article.

[Canadian-Ice]

Yeah, it seems the middle path isn't a bad one to take. Evidence we have suggests no affect of impact on longevity of a properly installed BHR. Giving up impact altogether would be a bit of a flinch at this point. But we don't have proof that high levels of impact won't eventually shorten the lifespan of the hip system. So if you love it, keep doing it. Just mix it up. My thoughts.

The oft overlooked part of the equation seems to me: what happens if a resurfacing does require revision? If a revision is as good as the original and lasts a lifetime, it's nothing to fear.

Well, we aren't there yet, I guess. And of course there are many possible reasons for revision, each with different results in terms of longevity and rigor.  My basic understanding is that resurfacings can be revised to a new resurfacing in some cases. But in the event of failure after many decades, which is what we are talking about in discussing impact sports, we are probably talking about aseptic loosening, in which case the person just gets a new, primary THR. And, there are people running on those, too.

If it were an acetabular cup that needed revision on THR or resurfacing, there is more bone taken out, and possibly bone grafts, and considerably more restriction with NO impact sports on the new Revision, as of 2014. Plus another revision not too far away. A major study on PubMed followed a large group of Revision THRs (from other THRs) for 15 years ending in 2006 and found about 73% survived 15 years, with a senior citizen cohort.

If we could have evidence to show, say, THR Revisions with revised acetabular cups lasting 25-30 years we would be in better territory. I'm sure that's possible with todays technology, But with these surgeries a lot has to come down to surgeon skill, diligence and athleticism of the patient, and so on.

[Arrojo]

Well, no training above 70% max effort doesn't work for sprinting. Sprint workouts require 90-95% effort, where it's quality over quantity. I would argue that piling up the miles puts more stress on the implant than simply pushing yourself and running fast.

[Canadian-Ice]

 I've woundered about that very question too. Does sprinting put more stress on the resurfacing fit even though the stress happens for only 10-30 seconds a set? I'm not sure how we can know the answer to that....

Also woundering about the effects of workouts that target all the glutes and hip stabilizers. How does that affect hip longevity for runners?

Another factor might be angles. How does running uphill compare with downhill?

Lots of decisions to make, I guess, whether a runner has OA or any device.