An initial experience with hip resurfacing versus cementless total hip arthroplasty.

Abstract

Hip resurfacing is an alternative to total hip arthroplasty. We aimed to compare an experienced hip surgeon's initial clinical results of hip resurfacing with a new cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). The first 55 consecutive hip resurfacing arthroplasties were compared to 100 consecutive cementless THAs using a cylindrical tapered femoral stem. The learning curve between the two procedures was compared utilizing the incidence of reoperation, complications, Harris Hip Scores (HHS), and implant survivorship. The reoperation rate was significantly higher (p = 0.019) for hip resurfacing (14.5%) versus THA (4%). The overall complication rate between the two groups was not significantly different (p = 0.398). Preoperative HHS were similar between the two groups (p = 0.2). The final mean HHS was similar in both the resurfacing and THA groups (96 vs. 98.3, respectively, p < 0.65). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with an endpoint of reoperation suggests complications occurred earlier in the resurfacing group versus the THA group (log-rank test, p = 0.007). In comparison to our initial experience with a cementless THA stem, operative complications occur earlier and more often after hip resurfacing during the learning period. The clinical outcomes in both groups however are similar at 5 year follow-up.