Disadvantages of Hip Resurfacing

The main disadvantage lies in not knowing the long term results. The results to date indicate that the success rate of hip resurfacing after the first 5-10 years is better than those of conventional total hip replacement. Although the operation for hip resurfacing is similar to a conventional total hip replacement, in some ways it is a more demanding surgical technique.

Some concerns have been raised about the release of metal ions into the body, however, to date no statistical correlation with long term systemic problems have been demonstrated, although work is still on going. It is worth noting that in the patients with historical metal on metal devices, some of which have been implanted for very long periods, no adverse reactions have been highlighted.

The usual risks associated with any hip replacement therefore apply - there is a very low risk of major complications due to infection or early loosening - thus leading to the need for further surgery. There is a lower risk of leg lengths being different. There is also a very low risk of major medical complications such as thrombosis, heart attack or stroke. This is the same for any surgery requiring an anaesthetic.