New Data Reinforces the Proven Safety and
Effectiveness of the BIRMINGHAM HIP Resurfacing System
80-percent of US surgeons choose the BHR hip
as it outperforms all other metal-on-metal resurfacing devices
MEMPHIS, Tenn., May 3 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Recent new data(1)
presented at this year’s American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS)
annual meeting reinforces the BIRMINGHAM HIP™ Resurfacing (BHR) System
as a safe and effective hip resurfacing device. The multi-site study,
performed by orthopedic surgeons practicing at nine Canadian academic
centers, showed that three years after surgery, 99.91% of their 3,400
hip resurfacing patients experienced no implant failure due to metal
wear debris. The BHR Hip was the most used resurfacing device in this
This week, the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) in New York City
will be holding a medical education course titled "Total Hip:
Replacement and Resurfacing" on May 7 and 8 for leading hip surgery
specialists from across the U.S. Chairing the course will be Edwin Su,
MD, of the Hospital for Special Surgery, and the teaching faculty will
include pioneering British surgeon Derek McMinn, MD, inventor of the BHR
During a press conference and Q&A webcast on Thursday, May 6, at 3
p.m. US EDT, 8 p.m. GMT, Joseph M. DeVivo, president of Smith & Nephew
Orthopaedics (NYSE: SNN, LSE: SN), the maker of the BHR Hip, will be
joined by Dr. Su and Mr. McMinn, as well as Scott Marwin, MD, an
orthopedic surgeon with New York University’s Hospital for Joint
Diseases. The panel will review current data confirming the safety and
effectiveness of hip resurfacing and the BHR Hip. Smith & Nephew
Orthopaedics will host the call, and additional details are at the
bottom of this release.
The new study recently presented at the AAOS meeting aligns with
previously released BHR Hip data from other prestigious sources and
further addresses the metal wear debris concerns raised about
metal-on-metal hip implants. The BHR Hip’s track record for longevity
remains unchallenged in the literature, as well. These sources include:
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery published in January of this
year a study tracking 155 consecutive BHR patients over three years.
The data showed no revisions of BHR Hips due to metal wear, but
patients who received a competing metal-on-metal resurfacing device
were revised within three years of surgery at a rate of 3.4-percent
due to adverse tissue reactions.(2)
Australian Orthopaedic Association’s 2008 National Joint Replacement
Registry, a record of nearly every hip implanted in that country
over the previous 10 years, tracked 6,773 BHR Hips and found that
less than one-third of one-percent may have been revised due to the
patient’s reaction to the metal component.(3)
Australian Registry hip resurfacing data for 2009, 70-percent of
which comes from BHR Hip procedures, indicates that for men under
age 65, hip resurfacing performs at the same or a better rate than
total hip replacement. This registry also shows that the BHR Hip
remains successful in 95-percent of cases eight years after surgery,
whereas no other implant performs better than 94.7-percent just five
years after surgery.(4)
Britain’s Oswestry Outcomes Centre’s patient registry, which
tracked 5,000 BHR Hips implanted by 148 different surgeons in 37
countries over 10 years (1998-2008), reports that the BHR Hip
remains successful in 95.4-percent of all patient segments 10 years
after surgery. This registry also reported that 98.6-percent of
patients were "pleased" or "extremely satisfied" with their BHR Hip
implants 10 years after their resurfacing procedure.(5)
McMinn’s clinical data, based on 3,095 hip resurfacing patients
implanted between 1997 and 2009, shows that more than 12 years after
surgery, the BHR hip remains successful in 99-percent of men aged 60
and over, and 97-percent for men under age 60.
"The BHR Hip’s outcomes are remarkable when compared to other
resurfacing devices," said Dr. Marwin. "The depth and consistency of the
data collected globally shows the BHR Hip is truly different."
"For the right patients in my practice, hip resurfacing has proven to
be an excellent choice," said Dr. Su. "They have extremely high levels
of satisfaction after returning to their regular lifestyle."
To explain the patient advantages seen consistently in the
literature, surgeons indicate the key differences between the BHR Hip
and other resurfacing devices are its metal composition, its design
geometry and its surgical instrumentation.
The BHR Hip has a unique metallurgy heritage which goes back more
than 30 years and includes a first-generation metal-on-metal resurfacing
process which contributes to long-term survivorship of BHR Hip
Additionally, the BHR Hip’s design geometry replicates the natural
hip’s ability to pull the body’s own joint fluids into the ball and
socket interface, which is believed to be another source of its
Of particular importance during hip resurfacing surgery is the
correct positioning of the acetabular cup, or hip socket. When this
component is not properly aligned, studies show that metal wear can
accelerate and resurfacing devices can fail before their time. Surgeons
believe that the instrument used to implant the BHR Hip is simpler and
more accurate than other devices’ instruments, and may contribute to its
"Just like the lubricating barrier in a healthy hip, there is a
natural fluid layer between the femoral head and the cup that the two
metal surfaces glide across during physical activity," said Mr. McMinn.
"If the surgeon malpositions the acetabular cup causing edge loading,
the lubrication is lost. It’s equivalent to running a car engine without
lubrication oil. High wear will occur, resulting in premature
failure. Overall, it is a combination of the metal composition, the
design and the quality of the surgical technique that makes the BHR Hip
the safest resurfacing implant on the market."
"The bottom line is that the BHR Hip is not like other metal-on-metal
hip implants," said DeVivo. "Not only does it have the longest track
record of any resurfacing device, but the most esteemed medical
literature shows it outlasts other implants. It’s in a class all its own
– it’s safe and effective, and is the best choice for active patients."
(1) Beaule PE, Smith FC, Powell JN et al. A Survey on the Incidence
of Pseudotumours with MOM Hip Resurfacings in Canadian Academic Centres.
Podium presentation # 665. Proceedings of the American Academy of
Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting, New Orleans LA. 2010
(2) Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Hallab NJ, Natu S, Nargol AVF.
Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and
large-diameter total hip replacement, A CONSEQUENCE OF EXCESS WEAR. J
Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010; 92-B: 38-46
(3) Table HT 46. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint
Replacement Registry Annual Report. Adelaide: AOA; 2008.
(4) Table HT 46. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint
Replacement Registry Annual Report. Adelaide: AOA; 2009.
(5) Robinson E, Richardson JB, Khan M. MINIMUM 10 YEAR OUTCOME OF
BIRMINGHAM HIP RESURFACING (BHR), A REVIEW OF 518 CASES FROM AN
INTERNATIONAL REGISTER. Oswestry outcome centre, Oswestry, UK.
Smith & Nephew is a global medical technology business, specialising
in Orthopaedics, including Reconstruction, Trauma and Clinical
Therapies; Endoscopy and Advanced Wound Management. Smith & Nephew is a
global leader in arthroscopy and advanced wound management and is one of
the leading global orthopaedics companies.
Smith & Nephew is dedicated to helping improve people’s lives. The
Company prides itself on the strength of its relationships with its
surgeons and professional healthcare customers, with whom its name is
synonymous with high standards of performance, innovation and trust.
The Company operates in 32 countries around the world. Annual sales in
2009 were nearly $3.8 billion.
This press release contains certain "forward-looking statements"
within the meaning of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. In particular, statements regarding expected revenue growth and
trading margins discussed under "Outlook" are forward-looking statements
as are discussions of our product pipeline. These statements, as well
as the phrases "aim", "plan", "intend", "anticipate", "well-placed",
"believe", "estimate", "expect", "target", "consider" and similar
expressions, are generally intended to identify forward-looking
statements. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown
risks, uncertainties and other important factors (including, but not
limited to, the outcome of litigation, claims and regulatory approvals)
that could cause the actual results, performance or achievements of
Smith & Nephew, or industry results, to differ materially from any
future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements. Please refer to the documents that Smith &
Nephew has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under
the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including Smith &
Nephew’s most recent annual report on Form 20F, for a discussion of
certain of these factors.
All forward-looking statements in this press release are based on
information available to Smith & Nephew as of the date hereof. All
written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to Smith &
Nephew or any person acting on behalf of Smith & Nephew are expressly
qualified in their entirety by the foregoing. Smith & Nephew does not
undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking
statement contained herein to reflect any change in Smith & Nephew’s
expectation with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or
circumstances on which any such statement is based.
Trademark of Smith & Nephew. Certain marks registered US Patent and