Skip to main content
. 2008 Aug 22;467(6):1516–1521. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0456-4

Fig. 2A–B.

Fig. 2A–B

(A) The second hip in our series was revised 6 months after resurfacing arthroplasty because the patient had persistent pain which we believed was related to an inferior component impingement after malpositioning of the socket. (B) The hip was revised to a conventional stem-type design (both components replaced). The patient did well after the revision surgery.