Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) can detect early micromovement in unstable implant designs which are likely subsequently to have a high failure rate. In 2010, the Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) was withdrawn because of a high failure rate. In 19 ASR femoral components, the mean micromovement over the first two years after implantation was 0.107 mm (sd 0.513) laterally, 0.055 mm (sd 0.204) distally and 0.150 mm (sd 0.413) anteriorly. The mean backward tilt around the x-axis was -0.08° (sd 1.088), mean internal rotation was 0.165° (sd 0.924) and mean varus tilt 0.238° (sd 0.420). The baseline to two-year varus tilt was statistically significant from zero movement, but there was no significant movement from one year onwards.

We conclude that the ASR femoral component achieves initial stability and that early migration is not the mode of failure for this resurfacing arthroplasty.

It is accepted that resurfacing hip replacement preserves the bone mineral density (BMD) of the femur better than total hip replacement (THR). However, no studies have investigated any possible difference on the acetabular side.

Between April 2007 and March 2009, 39 patients were randomised into two groups to receive either a resurfacing or a THR and were followed for two years. One patient’s resurfacing subsequently failed, leaving 19 patients in each group.

Resurfaced replacements maintained proximal femoral BMD and, compared with THR, had an increased bone mineral density in Gruen zones 2, 3, 6, and particularly zone 7, with a gain of 7.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6 to 12.5) compared with a loss of 14.6% (95% CI 7.6 to 21.6). Resurfacing replacements maintained the BMD of the medial femoral neck and increased that in the lateral zones between 12.8% (95% CI 4.3 to 21.4) and 25.9% (95% CI 7.1 to 44.6).

On the acetabular side, BMD was similar in every zone at each point in time. The mean BMD of all acetabular regions in the resurfaced group was reduced to 96.2% (95% CI 93.7 to 98.6) and for the total hip replacement group to 97.6% (95% CI 93.7 to 101.5) (p = 0.4863). A mean total loss of 3.7% (95% CI 1.0 to 6.5) and 4.9% (95% CI 0.8 to 9.0) of BMD was found above the acetabular component in W1 and 10.2% (95% CI 0.9 to 19.4) and 9.1% (95% CI 3.8 to 14.4) medial to the implant in W2 for resurfaced replacements and THRs respectively. Resurfacing resulted in a mean loss of BMD of 6.7% (95% CI 0.7 to 12.7) in W3 but the BMD inferior to the acetabular component was maintained in both groups.

These results suggest that the ability of a resurfacing hip replacement to preserve BMD only applies to the femoral side.