Table 5.
Comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival rates for hip resurfacing
| Study | Number of hips (type of implant) | Number of surgeons | Mean followup (years) | Kaplan-Meier survival rate* (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amstutz et al. [3] | 100 (Conserve® Plus) | 1 | 11.7 (10.8–12.9) | 88.5% (80.2%–93.6%)§ |
| Daniel et al. [11] | 107 (BHR†) | 1 1 |
10.6 (10.0–11.4) | 93.0% (92.2%–99.8%) 86.0% (80.5%–91.5%) |
| 184 (BHR‡) | 10.5 (10.0–11.1) | |||
| Baker et al. [5] | 63 (BHR) | 1 | 9.0 (8.2–10.3) | Not calculated |
| Treacy et al. [47] | 144 (BHR) | 1 | 10.8 (10.2–12.2) | 93.5% (89.2%–97.6%) |
| Current study | 100 (BHR) | 4 | 10.0 (9.3–10.5) | 87.8% (77.7%–93.1%) |
* All calculations are based on the assumption that patients lost to followup have not undergone revision; †with single thermal treatment of either hot isostatic pressing or solution heat treatment after being cast; ‡with double heat treatment after casting; §survival rate calculated at 10 years’ followup; BHR = Birmingham Hip® Resurfacing.