I have done some research on both BHR and the Biomet prosthesis as used by Dr. Gross. They seem to be similar in metallurgy and some research suggests that they may even be manufactured by the same company. However, the Australia Registry shows a failure rate for Biomet (assuming it's the same two components) as much higher than BHR. Can anyone explain this? I would appreciate it.
Its my understanding that the geometry and metallurgy of the two devices is very similar. Its the uncemented aspect now that would be the biggest difference, but both caps seem to perform well installed correctly.
I looked for the document I had read on the Australian data explanation, but couldn't find it. The point was that data was more a reflection of having an experienced surgeon rather than the device. The biomet pool of data was smaller and the data was made up of a bunch of surgeons only doing a few surgeries.
Note... I think that does actually reflect poorly on the Biomet in how they may have rolled out he device or trained the surgeons in Australia. i.e. you may be better off with a lousy device like the ASR installed by a good surgeon rather than a good device installed by a surgeon not skilled in resurfacing. But I digress.
If you're looking at Dr Gross though, that is somewhat moot since his results are very good.