Postoperative Rehabilitation After Hip Resurfacing: A Systematic Review

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Cheatham ◽  
Monique Mokha ◽  
Matt Lee
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
The Body ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Rehabilitation Programs

Context:Hip-resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has become a popular procedure in the treatment of hip-joint arthritis in individuals under the age of 65 y. Although the body of literature examining operative procedures has grown, there is a lack of consistent reporting of the effectiveness of an HRA postoperative rehabilitation program. To date, no systematic reviews have evaluated the available evidence on postoperative rehabilitation programs.Objective:To evaluate the available evidence on postoperative rehabilitation programs after HRA.Evidence Acquisition:A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. A search of PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar was conducted in April 2014 using the following keywords alone and in combination: postoperative, postsurgical, rehabilitation, physical therapy, programs, hip resurfacing, arthroplasty, and metal-on-metal. The grading of studies was conducted using the PEDro and Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine scales.Evidence Synthesis:The authors identified 648 citations, 4 of which met the inclusion criteria. The qualifying studies yielded 1 randomized control trial, 2 case reports, and 1 case series, for a total of 90 patients. Patients were mostly male (n = 86), had a mean age of 48 ± 5.47 y, and had been physically active before HRA. Postoperative rehabilitation programs varied in length (range 8–24 wk) and consisted of at least 3 phases. The methodology to assess program effects varied, but all 4 studies did measure a combination of function, pain, and quality of life using written questionnaires, with follow-up ranging from 9 mo to 1 y. The most common questionnaire was the Harris Hip Score.Conclusion:This review found postoperative rehabilitation programs after HRA to be underinvestigated. Limited results indicate that postoperative rehabilitation programs may be effective in improving gait (stride length, velocity, and cadence), hip range of motion, and pain and function, as measured by questionnaires, but not hip strength.

Postoperative Rehabilitation After Hip Arthroscopy: A Search for the Evidence

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott W. Cheatham ◽  
Keelan R. Enseki ◽  
Morey J. Kolber
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Hip Arthroscopy ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Weight Bearing ◽  
Case Series ◽  
The Body ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Rehabilitation Programs

Context:Hip arthroscopy has become an increasingly popular option for active individuals with recalcitrant hip pain. Conditions that may be addressed through hip arthroscopy include labral pathology, femoral acetabular impingement, capsular hyperlaxity, ligamentum teres tears, and the presence of intra-articular bodies. Although the body of literature examining operative procedures has grown, there is a paucity of evidence specifically on the efficacy of postoperative rehabilitation programs. To date, there are no systematic reviews that have evaluated the available evidence on postoperative rehabilitation.Objective:To evaluate the available evidence on postoperative rehabilitation programs after arthroscopy of the hip joint.Evidence Acquisition:A search of the PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar databases was conducted in January 2014 according the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting systematic reviews.Evidence Synthesis:Six studies met the inclusion criteria and were either case series or case reports (level 4 evidence) that described a 4- or 5-phase postoperative rehabilitation program. The available evidence supports a postoperative period of restricted weight bearing and mobility; however, the specific interventions in the postoperative phases are variable with no comparison trials.Conclusion:This review identified a paucity of evidence on postoperative rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy. Existing reports are descriptive in nature, so the superiority of a particular approach cannot be determined. One can surmise from existing studies that a 4- to 5-stage program with an initial period of weight-bearing and mobility precautions is efficacious in regard to function, patient satisfaction, and return to competitive-level athletics. Clinicians may consider such a program as a general guideline but should individualize treatment according to the surgical procedure and surgeon guidelines. Future research should focus on comparative trials to determine the effect of specific postoperative rehabilitation designs.

scholarly journals Return to Sport After Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596712110035
Author(s):  
Kyle W. Morse ◽  
Ajay Premkumar ◽  
Andrew Zhu ◽  
Rachelle Morgenstern ◽  
Edwin P. Su
Keyword(s):  
Case Series ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Professional Athletes ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Elite Level ◽  
Performance Statistics ◽  
And Performance ◽  
End Stage

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement and degenerative hip osteoarthritis (OA) affect athletes across a wide variety of sports. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has emerged as a surgical treatment for active individuals with end-stage hip OA to provide pain relief and allow return to high-impact activities. Return to professional sports after HRA has not been well characterized. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to report on a series of elite athletes in a variety of sports who underwent HRA. We hypothesized that professional and elite-level athletes would be able to return to sports after HRA for end-stage hip OA. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A retrospective case series was conducted on professional athletes who underwent HRA at a single institution between 2007 and 2017. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon using the posterolateral approach. Athletes’ return to play and sport-specific performance statistics were obtained using self-reported and publicly available data sources. Athletes were matched to an age- and performance-based cohort to determine changes in performance-based metrics. Results: Eight professional athletes were identified, including 2 baseball pitchers, 1 ice hockey defenseman, 1 foil fencer, 1 men’s doubles tennis player, 1 basketball player, 1 ultramarathoner, and 1 Ironman triathlete. All 8 patients returned to sports; 6 of 8 (75%) patients were able to return for at least 1 full season at a professional level after surgery. There were no significant differences between performance statistics for athletes who returned to play and their preoperative performance measures for the years leading up to surgery or the age- and performance-matched cohort. Conclusion: HRA remains a surgical alternative for end-stage hip OA in young, high-impact, active patients. While the primary goals of surgery are pain control and quality of life improvement, it is possible to return to elite-level sporting activity after HRA.

scholarly journals Do Complication Rates Differ by Gender After Metal-on-metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 473 (8) ◽  
pp. 2521-2529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan D. Haughom ◽  
Brandon J. Erickson ◽  
Michael D. Hellman ◽  
Joshua J. Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty in the same patient: which do they prefer?

2019 ◽  
pp. 112070001988292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler E Calkins ◽  
Linda I Suleiman ◽  
Chris Culvern ◽  
Sulaiman Alazzawi ◽  
Gregory S Kazarian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Contralateral Side ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Reported

Introduction: Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is an alternative to conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) with potential advantages of preserving femoral bone stock and the ability to participate in higher impact activities. This study compares outcomes, satisfaction and preference in patients who underwent HRA in 1 hip and THA on the contralateral side. Methods: 62 Patients with an HRA in 1 hip and a contralateral THA were retrospectively identified at 3 centres, consisting of 38 males and 24 females with 53 patients (85.5%) undergoing HRA first. A survey regarding satisfaction and preference for each procedure and outcome scores were obtained. Results: Patients were younger (51.5 vs. 56.6 years, p = 0.002) and had longer follow-up on the HRA hip (11.0 vs. 6.0 years, p < 0.001). HRA was associated with larger increase in Harris Hip Score from preoperative to final follow-up (35.8 vs. 30.6, p = 0.035). 18 Patients (29.0%) preferred HRA, 19 (30.6%) preferred THA and 25 (40.3%) had no preference ( p = 0.844). When asked what they would choose if they could only have 1 surgery again, 41 (66.1%, p < 0.001) picked HRA. Overall satisfaction ( p = 0.504), willingness to live with their HRA versus THA for the rest of their life ( p = 0.295) and recommendation to others ( p = 0.097) were similar. Conclusions: Although HRA is associated with risks related to metal-on-metal bearings, it showed greater increase in patient-reported outcomes and a small subjective preference amongst patients who have undergone both conventional and resurfacing arthroplasty.

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty for patients with inflammatory arthritis: a systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
Kyle W. Morse ◽  
Edwin P. Su
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Neck Fracture

Introduction: Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty has led to decreased revision rates and high implant survival rates as compared to prior generations of resurfacing. Many of the series that report on resurfacing outcomes focus upon patients treated with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis. Patients with inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are also treated in these series, however, their outcomes following resurfacing are underreported. The aim of this study was to determine complications that may occur following hip resurfacing in patients with inflammatory arthritis. A secondary aim was to determine functional outcomes following resurfacing. Methods: A search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed/OVID), Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. 5 studies met eligibility criteria. This review includes 196 hips; 120 had a diagnosis of AS or seronegative spondyloarthropathy and 76 had a diagnosis of RA or juvenile RA. 8 revisions were reported at a mean time of 64.2 (8.67-275.58) weeks. Results: Femoral neck fracture was the most common indication for revision, occurring in 3.06% of all hips at 34.5 weeks (16.0-52.0). 2 infections, 2 reports of acetabular radiolucency, and no dislocations were reported. The University of California at Los Angeles score, Harris Hip Score, and Range of Motion were the most common functional outcomes measured, which increased in the majority of studies following resurfacing. Conclusions: Femoral neck fracture was the most common reason for revision in patients with inflammatory arthritis following resurfacing and there were no dislocations reported. Following resurfacing, these patients have improved functional outcomes.

10-year results of ReCap hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a non-designer case series

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 393-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manish Kiran ◽  
Sunil Santhapuri ◽  
Sara Moeen ◽  
Irfan Merchant ◽  
Dan Arvinte ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Series ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty

Quality of Life in Different Age Groups after Metal-On-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.V. Papavasiliou ◽  
R.N. Villar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Implant Survival ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Group I ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
One Year

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty is known to improve quality of life (QoL) and allow increased activity levels in young patients. It is, however, traditionally offered to the younger age group of patients, largely those aged under 60 years. We studied 42 consecutive patients (42 hips) aged 60 years or over (mean age 64) and 41 consecutive patients (42 hips) under this age (mean age 49), all of whom had undergone a metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A modified Harris hip score was translated to QoL scores using the Rosser Index Matrix immediately pre-operatively and at six weeks, six months, one year and four years after surgery. We found a significant improvement in QoL for both groups (p<0.0001) but no difference between the two groups. The maximum improvement was reached one year after surgery. Implant survival at four years was also similar (97.6% for group I and 100% for group II). We thus conclude that in carefully selected active patients aged 60 years and over, hip resurfacing arthroplasty provides significant and equal QoL improvement as it does for those under this age with similar implant survival. For this reason, age alone should not influence a surgeon's decision to proceed with a hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document