Hip resurfacing is considered by many to be a conservative alternative to conventional total hip arthroplasty. There are advantages and drawbacks to any procedure, and there is a learning curve associated with the introduction of any new technology. The purpose of this study is to report the complication rate, types of complications, and outcomes of hip resurfacing during the early experience of two high-volume hip surgeons.Methods:
Seventy-three hip resurfacing procedures were performed in sixty-four patients between September 2006 and March 2009. These procedures represented 6% of all of the primary hip arthroplasty procedures performed by the two surgeons.Results:
After an average duration of follow-up of twenty-five months, there were six revisions—i.e., an early failure rate of 8%. These revisions were performed to treat two deep infections, two femoral neck fractures, one case of femoral implant loosening, and one failure of an acetabular implant.Conclusions:
Because of a high early failure rate, we have reduced the utilization of hip resurfacing in our patients who are candidates for hip arthroplasty.Level of Evidence:
Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.