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

Revision Rates & High Survival Rates in Large-head Metal-on-metal THA vs. Metal-on-polyethylene THA

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
March 2025

Revision Rates & High Survival Rates in Large-head Metal-on-metal THA vs. Metal-on-polyethylene THA

Vol: 307| Issue: 3| Number:25| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

No Difference in Revision Rates and High Survival Rates in Large-head Metal-on-metal THA Versus Metal-on-polyethylene THA: Long-term Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024 Jul 1;482(7):1173-1182.

Contributing Authors:
W Spierenburg AJ de Vries MF Boomsma S Siepelinga T Wetzels JJAM van Raaij

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

Synopsis

One hundred four patients undergoing THA were randomized to receive either cementless large-head metal-on-metal (MoM) THA (n=50) or cementless metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA (n=54). The primary outcome of interest was survivorship free from revision for any cause at 10 years. Secondary outcomes included pseudotumor formation, functional outcomes (Oxford Hip Score and Harris Hip Score), and serum ...

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