Literature DB >> 19727991

Metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: does early clinical outcome justify the chance of an adverse local tissue reaction?

Charles A Engh1, Henry Ho, Charles A Engh1.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Larger diameter metal-on-metal (MOM) bearing hips offer the possibility of low wear and reduced risk of dislocation. We reviewed the first 126 patients (131 hips) who had a large-head (36-mm) MOM bearing surface to report the early clinical outcome and especially to determine the occurrence of dislocation and wear-related concerns. The minimum followup was 5 years (mean, 5.6 years; range, 5-7 years). We found a 98% survivorship free of component revision. No hips had been revised for dislocation. Three hips (2%) had small femoral osteolytic lesions. Because this series of patients did not completely represent our experience with this bearing surface, we queried our database for the 828 patients (945 hips) that had the same bearing surface from April 2001 to December 2008. Three patients (0.3%) had a local reaction to the MOM bearing surface on revision-retrieved tissue. All three patients presented with elevated inflammatory indices, and a purulent-appearing joint effusion at revision. The possibility of infection and the delay in diagnosing a reaction to the MOM bearing with pathology complicated management of these three patients. We continue to use this bearing surface because the 5-year results are comparable to other bearing surfaces, however, we counsel patients that a local adverse reaction to the MOM bearing surface may be a factor contributing to reoperation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective clinical cohort. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19727991      PMCID: PMC2807005          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-009-1063-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  25 in total

1.  Metallosis after contemporary metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Five to nine-year follow-up.

Authors:  P Korovessis; G Petsinis; M Repanti; T Repantis
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Survivorship and retrieval analysis of Sikomet metal-on-metal total hip replacements at a mean of seven years.

Authors:  Ingrid Milosev; Rihard Trebse; Simon Kovac; Andrej Cör; Venceslav Pisot
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Thomas P Vail; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 4.  Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants.

Authors:  N Hallab; K Merritt; J J Jacobs
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Total hip arthroplasty with use of the Metasul metal-on-metal articulation. Four to seven-year results.

Authors:  L D Dorr; Z Wan; D B Longjohn; B Dubois; R Murken
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Failure of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty mimicking hip infection. A report of two cases.

Authors:  Mark M Mikhael; Arlen D Hanssen; Rafael J Sierra
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  The epidemiology of bearing surface usage in total hip arthroplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Steven Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Vanessa Chiu; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Metal sensitivity as a cause of groin pain in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Pat Campbell; Andrew Shimmin; Len Walter; Michael Solomon
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-03-14       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Harlan C Amstutz; Paul E Beaulé; Frederick J Dorey; Michel J Le Duff; Pat A Campbell; Thomas A Gruen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip in patients under the age of 55 years with osteoarthritis.

Authors:  J Daniel; P B Pynsent; D J W McMinn
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-03
View more
  15 in total

1.  Low incidence of groin pain and early failure with large metal articulation total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  John B Meding; Lindsey K Meding; E Michael Keating; Michael E Berend
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Management of failed metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Justin W Griffin; Michele D'Apuzzo; James A Browne
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2012-06-18

3.  Revisions of monoblock metal-on-metal THAs have high early complication rates.

Authors:  Louis S Stryker; Susan M Odum; Thomas K Fehring; Bryan D Springer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Trunnion Failure of the Recalled Low Friction Ion Treatment Cobalt Chromium Alloy Femoral Head.

Authors:  Kenneth L Urish; Brian R Hamlin; Anton Y Plakseychuk; Timothy J Levison; Genymphas B Higgs; Steven M Kurtz; Anthony M DiGioia
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  What Is the Incidence of Cobalt-Chromium Damage Modes on the Bearing Surface of Contemporary Femoral Component Designs for Total Knee Arthroplasty?

Authors:  Christina M Arnholt; Daniel W MacDonald; Gregg R Klein; Harold E Cates; Clare M Rimnac; Steven M Kurtz; Sevi Kocagoz; Antonia F Chen
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 4.757

6.  Failed metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties: a spectrum of clinical presentations and operative findings.

Authors:  James A Browne; C Dustin Bechtold; Daniel J Berry; Arlen D Hanssen; David G Lewallen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  [Update on metal-on-metal hip joints].

Authors:  K-P Günther; J Lützner; F Hannemann; J Schmitt; S Kirschner; J Goronzy; M Stiehler; C Lohmann; A Hartmann
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  High complication rate after revision of large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jacob T Munro; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan; Donald S Garbuz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  What Is the Risk of THA Revision for ARMD in Patients with Non-metal-on-metal Bearings? A Study from the Australian National Joint Replacement Registry.

Authors:  R N de Steiger; Alesha Hatton; Yi Peng; Stephen Graves
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 4.755

10.  Retrospective cohort study of the performance of the Pinnacle metal on metal (MoM) total hip replacement: a single-centre investigation in combination with the findings of a national retrieval centre.

Authors:  David John Langton; Raghavendra Prasad Sidaginamale; Peter Avery; Sue Waller; Ghanshyabhai Tank; James Lord; Thomas Joyce; Nick Cooke; Raj Logishetty; Antoni Viraf Francis Nargol
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.