Send to

Choose Destination
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Feb;93(2):158-63. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25625.

A medium-term comparison of hybrid hip replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing in active young patients.

Author information

Avon Orthopaedic Centre, Southmead Hospital, Westbury-on-Trym, Bristol BS10 5NB, UK.


We compared the medium-term clinical and radiological results of hybrid total hip replacement (THR) with metal-on-metal Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR) in two groups of 54 young patients matched for age, gender, body mass index and pre-operative levels of activity. The clinical outcome was assessed by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EuroQol scores. Radiologically, all hips were assessed for migration and osteolysis, the hybrid THRs for polyethylene wear and the BHRs for a pedestal sign. The mean follow-up of the patients with a hybrid THR was ten years and for those with a BHR, nine years. Four patients with a hybrid THR and one with a BHR had died. In each group five were lost to follow-up. The revision rate of the hybrid THRs was 16.7% (9 of 54) and of the BHRs 9.3% (5 of 54) (p = 0.195). Radiographs of a further eight hybrid THRs demonstrated wear and osteolysis, and they await revision (p = 0.008). Of the unrevised BHRs 90% had radiological changes, of which approximately 50% had progressed over the previous four years. All hybrid THRs demonstrated linear polyethylene wear with a mean of 1.24 mm (0.06 to 3.03). The BHRs recorded superior OHS (p = 0.013), UCLA (p = 0.008), and EuroQol visual analogue scores (p = 0.009). After nine years, patients with BHRs remained more active and had a lower rate of revision than those with hybrid THRs. Both groups demonstrated progressive radiological changes at medium-term follow-up.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Bone and Joint Publishing
Loading ...
Support Center