Abstract
Today, we see younger patients with hip problems, so bone preservation and highly wear-resistant bearings are becoming more relevant. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (HR) has now been used for 20 years. To achieve bone preservation, less bearing wear, and higher patient activity, the trade-off has been a more technically difficult surgery and subsequent failures. The lack of knowledge about HR implant design, tribology, and mechanical properties has led to a general desire to try out this concept but also to this procedure being abandoned. However, history always comes back to the resurfacing technique because it looks like a more anatomical, biomechanical, and logical treatment. Today, there is extensive history with metal-on-metal resurfacing, with experimental work done than in typical THA implants. It is vital that we do not make the same mistakes twice, and we should be wary of any newly introduced solution that is inadequate at this moment.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Girard, J., & De Smet, K. (2020). Reproducing the proximal femur anatomy using hip resurfacing implants. In Personalized Hip and Knee Joint Replacement (pp. 35–44). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24243-5_4
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.