|
Menu |
|
|
|
|
Small donations are
very
much appreciated to help support
Surface Hippy.
|
|
|
BHR (Birmingham Hip
Resurfacing) Information and History
*Gathered by
Vicky Marlow Freelance Patient Advocate
Volunteer Miami Orthopedic Conference 10/2007
|
BHR 10 years of Data
The first BHR was implanted
in July 1997 and it is unchanged until present day.
|
96.1% survivorship overall
|
|
McMinn 99.8% at 8 years
|
| Treacy 99% at
minimum 5 years |
| Shimmin et al
99.14% at 3 years |
|
Oswestry Cohort, FDA
approval Data 2006 98.7% at 4 years
|
U.S. Statistics as of 10/2007
|
There have been 1000 surgeons trained to date |
|
Only
about 50% of those surgeons actually do the
procedure (they are all however listed on the
Smith &Nephew website |
There have been 7000 BHR's installed
in the U.S. to date
|
Oswestry Registry 5000
BHR's to date 2007
|
99.8% survivorship at 3.3
years
|
|
95.7 % at 8 years |
| 99.5% of these patients
were happy at 5 years. |
| 3227 were male, 1602
female, there were 50 revisions, 14 were
fractures, 14 collapsed neck |
|
95.7% satisfied at 8 years
|
|
The 1.5% neck fracture -
due to learning curve.
|
Australian National Joint Registry
|
Resurfacing hip systems requiring
revisions 1999 - 2007 |
|
BHR device implantation in Australia
started in 1999 |
|
Competitors devices started in 2000/2001 |
|
Resurfacing Product |
Number revised |
Total Number |
% Revised |
Observed Component years |
Revisions per 100 observed component
years |
|
ASR |
31 |
753 |
4.1 |
1042 |
3 |
|
BHR |
166 |
6773 |
2.5 |
19585 |
0.8 |
|
Conserve Plus |
4 |
59 |
6.8 |
134 |
3 |
|
Cormet 2000 |
8 |
95 |
8.4 |
288 |
2.8 |
|
Durom |
25 |
564 |
4.4 |
927 |
2.7 |
|
Recap |
2 |
50 |
4 |
81 |
2.5 |
These numbers were all from the Australian Hip
Registry which was
established in 1999. A total of 140,018 patients
registered with
160349 procedures out of which 8361 were
resurfacings.
The BHR was started in 1999 and the competitors
started in 2000 and
2001. This is the latest data published in that
registry. I am sure
there are more details in the registry itself,
but this is all the
data, well minus 1% of resurfacing done in
Australia. I think it is
somewhat a good overall feel for the results
considering it is
gathered over almost the same amount of time,
from all of Australia
in all patients given the procedure which would
cover all doctors, etc.
|
|
|
