Literature DB >> 23690156

Does femoral neck to cup impingement affect metal ion levels in hip resurfacing?

Michel J Le Duff1, Alicia J Johnson, Andrew J Wassef, Harlan C Amstutz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Impingement of the femoral neck with the acetabular component after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a possible cause of edge loading and accelerated bearing wear. No attempt has been made to correlate radiographic impingement signs and blood metal ion levels. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We (1) compared serum cobalt (CoS) and chromium (CrS) concentrations between patients with and without radiographic impingement signs treated with unilateral HRA, (2) determined whether divot depth on the femoral neck correlated with CoS and CrS, and (3) assessed the predictive value of radiographic impingement signs for high levels of CoS and CrS.
METHODS: A retrospective radiographic review of 141 patients with CoS and CrS analyses yielded 21 patients with and 120 without radiographic impingement signs (controls). Radiographic measurements included divot depth and orientation of the acetabular component to compute the contact patch to rim distance, a measure of functional head coverage. We defined a patient as having radiographic impingement signs if a remodeling of the femoral neck cortex showed a depression matching the predicted path of an impinging acetabular component. CoS and CrS were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and the radiographs were taken within 12 months of the last blood draw.
RESULTS: Median CoS and CrS were greater in the impingement group than in controls in patients with less than 10-mm contact patch to rim distances. Divot depth did not correlate with CoS or CrS. In predicting elevated ion levels (≥ 7 μg/L), the presence of a radiographic impingement sign showed a sensitivity of 50% for CoS and 33% for CrS and a specificity of 87% for both CoS and CrS.
CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic impingement signs influenced CoS and CrS only when the functional head coverage was insufficient due to poor socket positioning. Radiographic impingement signs alone were not a good predictor of elevated metal ion levels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23690156      PMCID: PMC3890152          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3074-8

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


  28 in total

1.  How do serum cobalt and chromium levels change after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing?

Authors:  Diane L Back; D A Young; A J Shimmin
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  The effects of technique changes on aseptic loosening of the femoral component in hip resurfacing. Results of 600 Conserve Plus with a 3 to 9 year follow-up.

Authors:  Harlan C Amstutz; Michel J Le Duff; Patricia A Campbell; Frederick J Dorey
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens.

Authors:  Michael M Morlock; Nick Bishop; Jozef Zustin; Michael Hahn; Wolfgang Rüther; Michael Amling
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Retrieval analysis of 240 metal-on-metal hip components, comparing modular total hip replacement with hip resurfacing.

Authors:  A Matthies; R Underwood; P Cann; K Ilo; Z Nawaz; J Skinner; A J Hart
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2011-03

Review 5.  The evolution of hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Peter Grigoris; Paul Roberts; Kostantinos Panousis; Hendrik Bosch
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.472

6.  The 2012 Otto Aufranc Award: The interpretation of metal ion levels in unilateral and bilateral hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Catherine Van Der Straeten; George Grammatopoulos; Harinderjit S Gill; Alessandro Calistri; Patricia Campbell; Koen A De Smet
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Femoroacetabular cup impingement after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip.

Authors:  Seung-Jae Lim; Jin-Hong Kim; Young-Wan Moon; Youn-Soo Park
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2011-03-17       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  Impingement between the acetabular cup and the femoral neck after hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Authors:  Myung Chul Yoo; Yoon Je Cho; Young Soo Chun; Kee Hyung Rhyu
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Characterization of the running-in period in total hip resurfacing arthroplasty: an in vivo and in vitro metal ion analysis.

Authors:  Christian Heisel; Nikolaus Streich; Michael Krachler; Eike Jakubowitz; J Philippe Kretzer
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Edge loading in metal-on-metal hips: low clearance is a new risk factor.

Authors:  Richard J Underwood; Angelos Zografos; Ritchie S Sayles; Alister Hart; Philippa Cann
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.617

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.