A comparative analysis of Giliberty, Bateman, and Universal femoral head prostheses. A long-term follow-up evaluation

This study compares four different types of bipolar hip prostheses used from 1977 to 1984. The devices studied were the Giliberty I and II hip prostheses, the Bateman I prosthesis, and the Universal Hip Replacement (UHR) prosthesis. The surgical indications for prosthetic hip replacement in all cases were displaced subcapital hip fractures (Garden Types 3 and 4). Postoperative evaluation included D'Aubigńe's hip rating system and roentgenograms to assess prosthetic placement, dislocation, disassembly of the components, and the presence of inner and outer bearing motion of the prostheses. Results of the study revealed intact inner bearing motion in all of the devices investigated in the immediate postoperative period. The UHR prosthesis demonstrated a statistically significant lower incidence of dislocation and no incidence of prosthesis disassembly. This study demonstrates the superiority of the bipolar prosthesis when compared to published results of the so-called unipolar prosthesis and also suggests superiority of the design and function of the UHR prosthesis when compared to the Bateman I and Giliberty prostheses. Longer follow-up evaluation is needed to assess the effects of a functioning bipolar prosthesis on acetabular wear.