Literature DB >> 24970319

Revision of metal-on-metal hip replacements and resurfacings for adverse reaction to metal debris: a systematic review of outcomes.

Gulraj S Matharu1, Paul B Pynsent, David J Dunlop.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This systematic review assessed evidence on outcomes following revision of MoM hip resurfacings (HRs) and total hip replacements (THRs) for adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD).
METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched between January 2009 and July 2013 to identify studies reporting clinical outcomes following revision of MoM HRs and THRs for ARMD. Only studies reporting cohorts with more than 10 metal-on-metal (MoM) hips revised for ARMD were included. Outcomes of interest following ARMD revision were: (1) complication rates; (2) re-revision rates; (3) surgical intervention other than re-revision; (4) functional outcome.
RESULTS: Of 148 unique studies identified, six studies were eligible for inclusion containing 216 MoM hips (197 HRs and 19 THRs) revised for ARMD. Mean follow-up time from ARMD revision ranged between 21-61 months. Complication rates were 4%-50% for HR and 68% for THR. Re-revision rates were 3%-38% for HR and 21% for THR. Dislocation (n = 14), ARMD recurrence (n = 11), and acetabular loosening (n = 9) were the three commonest complications and indications for re-revision. All six studies reported between one and three cases of ARMD recurrence during follow-up. One study specifically reported on performing procedures other than re-revision with 26% requiring closed reductions for dislocated THRs. Functional outcomes following ARMD revision were good or satisfactory in all but two studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Limited evidence exists regarding outcomes following revision of MoM hips for ARMD, especially for THRs. This should be addressed in future studies and may be important when counselling asymptomatic individuals in whom revision is considered for raised blood metal ions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24970319     DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000140

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hip Int        ISSN: 1120-7000            Impact factor:   2.135


  22 in total

1.  Patient-Reported Outcomes After Revision of Metal-on-Metal Total Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ana Mata-Fink; Daniel J Philipson; Benjamin J Keeney; Dipak B Ramkumar; Wayne E Moschetti; Ivan M Tomek
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Salvage of a monoblock metal-on-metal cup using a dual mobility liner: a two-year MRI follow-up study.

Authors:  Maximilian F Kasparek; Lisa Renner; Martin Faschingbauer; Wenzel Waldstein; Kilian Rueckl; Friedrich Boettner
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Outcome of surgical management for midurethral sling complications: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Victoria Kershaw; Rachel Nicholson; Paul Ballard; Aethele Khunda; Santhosh Puthuraya; Elaine Gouk
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 4.  Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: risk factors for pseudotumours and clinical systematic evaluation.

Authors:  Ming Han Lincoln Liow; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  The utility of repeat ultrasound imaging in the follow-up of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  G S Matharu; S Janardhan; L Brash; P B Pynsent; D J Dunlop; S L J James
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Perioperative factors associated with increased length of stay after revision of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jonathan H Garfinkel; Brian P Gladnick; Cole S Pachter; Niall H Cochrane; David W Romness
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-01-17

Review 7.  Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty: A Review of Adverse Reactions and Patient Management.

Authors:  James Drummond; Phong Tran; Camdon Fary
Journal:  J Funct Biomater       Date:  2015-06-26

8.  Which imaging modality is most effective for identifying pseudotumours in metal-on-metal hip resurfacings requiring revision: ultrasound or MARS-MRI or both?

Authors:  G S Matharu; R Mansour; O Dada; S Ostlere; H G Pandit; D W Murray
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 5.082

9.  Factors associated with symptomatic pseudotumors following metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Masahiro Hasegawa; Yohei Naito; Toshio Yamaguchi; Shinichi Miyazaki; Hiroki Wakabayashi; Akihiro Sudo
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-11-07       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Adverse reactions to metal debris occur with all types of hip replacement not just metal-on-metal hips: a retrospective observational study of 3340 revisions for adverse reactions to metal debris from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man.

Authors:  Gulraj S Matharu; Hemant G Pandit; David W Murray; Andrew Judge
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-12-13       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.