Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 17, 2026
The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
Published on: August 4, 2022
A comparison of two resurfacing arthroplasty implants: medium-term clinical and radiographic results
Denis Nam1, Patrick Maher, Brian J Rebolledo
1Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021, USA. namd@hss.edu
Abstract:
The objective of this study was to perform a medium-term analysis comparing the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the CONSERVE® Plus (C+) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty systems. 137 hips were included in each cohort, with a mean follow-up of 60.0 ± 14.2 months and 63.3 ± 3.5 months in the C+ and BHR cohorts respectively. Latest review UCLA and HHS scores showed statistically significant improvements when compared with preoperative scores for both cohorts. UCLA and SF-12 physical component outcome scores were significantly different (p<0.01 and p = 0.04, respectively). Median serum chromium and cobalt levels were significantly increased in the BHR cohort (p = 0.001). Both cohorts demonstrated excellent Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates (96.9% in the C+ cohort, and 96.4% in the BHR cohort). Overall both implants appear to perform well in the medium term.
