Thomas R Williamson, Ian W Kennedy, Mark R J Jenkinson, Ben Wheelwright, Nicholas Kane, R M Dominic Meek
{"title":"Durom hip resurfacing at 15 years : predictive factors for failure.","authors":"Thomas R Williamson, Ian W Kennedy, Mark R J Jenkinson, Ben Wheelwright, Nicholas Kane, R M Dominic Meek","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.107B6.BJJ-2024-1045.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>A range of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) implants have shown good functional outcomes, but some have been associated with adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) and early failure, requiring regular follow-up and monitoring of the blood metal ion levels. The aim of this study was to report the minimum 15-year survival of the Durom hip resurfacing system (Zimmer Biomet, USA), the functional outcome, and factors which were predictive of failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A consecutive series of patients undergoing Durom MoM-HR at a single centre between January 2000 and December 2008 were included. Demographic variables, the size of the implant, radiological parameters, and the most recent blood metal ion levels were collected. The primary outcome measure was failure; secondary outcome measures included the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict failure and identify the factors most strongly associated with failure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 695 hips in 597 patients, 61.2% of whom were male, were included. The mean age of the patients was 51.5 years (SD 8.7). Survival at a mean follow-up of 15.2 years (SD 1.9) was 86.6% (602 of 695 hips). Implant survival was significantly increased in males (92.2% (95% CI 89.7 to 94.8) vs 77.8% (95% CI 72.8 to 82.7); p < 0.001) and with femoral components sized ≥ 50 mm (91.7% (95% CI 88.7 to 94.7) vs 82.3% (95% CI 78.4 to 86.2); p < 0.001). Failure was mostly due to aseptic loosening (42 hips; 6%) and ARMD (27 hips; 3.9%). The mean postoperative OHS was 31.9 (SD 13.5) for patients requiring revision and 41.8 (SD 9.2) for those not requiring revision (p < 0.001). Predictive factors of failure in the regression model included sex, the angle of inclination and migration of the acetabular component, the postoperative OHS and the blood chromium ion levels (Pseudo-R<sup>2</sup> 0.279). Standardized regression coefficients were greatest for migration of the acetabular component (0.855) and OHS (-0.606).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study presents the longest reported follow-up for the Durom MoM-HR, with excellent survival and functional outcomes at 15 years' follow-up in males and with ≥ 50 mm femoral components. Most failures were due to aseptic loosening. Migration of the acetabular component and symptomatology (OHS) were the factors which most strongly predicted failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"107-B 6 Supple B","pages":"55-61"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.107B6.BJJ-2024-1045.R1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: A range of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) implants have shown good functional outcomes, but some have been associated with adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) and early failure, requiring regular follow-up and monitoring of the blood metal ion levels. The aim of this study was to report the minimum 15-year survival of the Durom hip resurfacing system (Zimmer Biomet, USA), the functional outcome, and factors which were predictive of failure.
Methods: A consecutive series of patients undergoing Durom MoM-HR at a single centre between January 2000 and December 2008 were included. Demographic variables, the size of the implant, radiological parameters, and the most recent blood metal ion levels were collected. The primary outcome measure was failure; secondary outcome measures included the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict failure and identify the factors most strongly associated with failure.
Results: A total of 695 hips in 597 patients, 61.2% of whom were male, were included. The mean age of the patients was 51.5 years (SD 8.7). Survival at a mean follow-up of 15.2 years (SD 1.9) was 86.6% (602 of 695 hips). Implant survival was significantly increased in males (92.2% (95% CI 89.7 to 94.8) vs 77.8% (95% CI 72.8 to 82.7); p < 0.001) and with femoral components sized ≥ 50 mm (91.7% (95% CI 88.7 to 94.7) vs 82.3% (95% CI 78.4 to 86.2); p < 0.001). Failure was mostly due to aseptic loosening (42 hips; 6%) and ARMD (27 hips; 3.9%). The mean postoperative OHS was 31.9 (SD 13.5) for patients requiring revision and 41.8 (SD 9.2) for those not requiring revision (p < 0.001). Predictive factors of failure in the regression model included sex, the angle of inclination and migration of the acetabular component, the postoperative OHS and the blood chromium ion levels (Pseudo-R2 0.279). Standardized regression coefficients were greatest for migration of the acetabular component (0.855) and OHS (-0.606).
Conclusion: This study presents the longest reported follow-up for the Durom MoM-HR, with excellent survival and functional outcomes at 15 years' follow-up in males and with ≥ 50 mm femoral components. Most failures were due to aseptic loosening. Migration of the acetabular component and symptomatology (OHS) were the factors which most strongly predicted failure.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.