To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Hip Resurfacing vs Large Diameter Head THA in Patients with Degenerative Hip Joint Disease

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
May 2021

Hip Resurfacing vs Large Diameter Head THA in Patients with Degenerative Hip Joint Disease

Vol: 36| Issue: 1| Number:1| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Despite higher revision rate, MoM large-head THA offers better clinical scores than HR: 14-year results from a randomized controlled trial involving 48 patients

Randomized Controlled Trial BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Apr 30.

Contributing Authors:
L Kostretzis M Lavigne MO Kiss M Shahin J Barry PA Vendittoli

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Forty-eight patients with degenerative hip joint disease were randomized to a large diameter head total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a metal-on-metal implant (n=24) or hip resurfacing (HR) with a metal-on-metal implant (n=24). Outcomes of interest included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, For...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue