Literature DB >> 26109153

Predicting high blood metal ion concentrations following hip resurfacing.

Gulraj S Matharu1, Fiona Berryman1, Lesley Brash1, Paul B Pynsent1, Ronan B C Treacy1, David J Dunlop1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether gender, femoral head size, acetabular inclination, and time since surgery predicted high blood metal ion concentrations following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR).
METHODS: BHR patients with unilateral bearings at one specialist centre with blood cobalt and chromium concentrations measured up to May 2013 were included. This comprised a mixed (at-risk) group including symptomatic patients and asymptomatic individuals with specific clinical and/or radiological findings. Blood sampling was at a mean of 7.5 years (range 1-15.4 years) postoperatively.
RESULTS: Of 319 patients (mean age 49.3 years; 53% male), blood metal ions greater than 7 µg/l were observed in 9% (n = 28). Blood metal ions were significantly higher in females (p<0.001), femoral head sizes ≤48 mm (p<0.01), and cup inclinations >55° (p<0.001). Linear regression demonstrated femoral head size was responsible for the highest proportion of variance in blood metal ions (cobalt p<0.001, R2 = 8%; chromium p<0.001, R2 = 11%). Analysis of femoral head size and inclination together demonstrated 36% of BHRs with head sizes of 38-44 mm and inclination >55° had blood metal ions >7 µg/l. BHR 10-year survival for this at-risk group was 91% (95% confidence intervals 86.0%-95.0%) with 30 hips revised.
CONCLUSIONS: If blood metal ions are used to screen hip resurfacing patients for adverse reactions to metal debris it is recommended those with small femoral head sizes (38-44 mm) and high acetabular inclinations (>55°) are targeted. These findings require validation in other cohorts as they may not be applicable to all hip resurfacing devices given the differences in radial clearance, coverage arc, and metallurgy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26109153     DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000258

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


  5 in total

1.  Current indications for hip resurfacing arthroplasty in 2016.

Authors:  Robert Sershon; Rishi Balkissoon; Craig J Della Valle
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-03

2.  How much does a Medical and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency medical device alert for metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients really cost?

Authors:  Rajpal S Nandra; Usman Ahmed; Fiona Berryman; Lesley Brash; David J Dunlop; Gulraj S Matharu
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 1.756

3.  Correlation of serum metal ion levels with pathological changes of ARMD in failed metal-on-metal-hip-resurfacing arthroplasties.

Authors:  George Grammatopoulos; Mitsuru Munemoto; Athanasios Pollalis; Nicholas A Athanasou
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Comparing 1-year and 10-year whole blood metal ion results following Birmingham hip resurfacing for osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Scott J Watt Kearns; Jonathan Bourget-Murray; Kelly Johnston; Jason Werle
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 2.840

5.  What is appropriate surveillance for metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients?

Authors:  Gulraj S Matharu; Andrew Judge; Antti Eskelinen; David W Murray; Hemant G Pandit
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 3.717

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.