A biomechanical comparison of epiphyseal versus metaphyseal fixed bone-conserving hip arthroplasty

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 May:93 Suppl 2:122-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01709.

Abstract

Background: The Birmingham Mid-Head Resection (BMHR) is a bone-conserving, short-stem alternative to hip resurfacing for patients with abnormal femoral head anatomy.

Methods: The current study examines whether a bone-preserving femoral component that is fixed into the femoral neck metaphysis provides a mechanical advantage in terms of resisting femoral neck fracture in comparison with a conventional hip resurfacing implant in a human cadaveric femoral model.

Results: Femora with a BMHR femoral component failed at an average of 23% less load than those prepared with a conventional hip resurfacing component (mean and standard deviation, 5434 ± 2297 compared with 7012 ± 2619 N; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: An uncemented, metaphyseal fixed, bone-conserving femoral implant does not provide superior mechanical strength or increased resistance to femoral neck fracture in comparison with a conventional hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Absorptiometry, Photon
  • Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods*
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Bone Density
  • Cadaver
  • Epiphyses / diagnostic imaging
  • Epiphyses / physiopathology
  • Epiphyses / surgery*
  • Femur / diagnostic imaging
  • Femur / physiopathology
  • Femur / surgery*
  • Hip Prosthesis*
  • Humans
  • Linear Models