Literature DB >> 26449333

Current expert views on metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Consensus of the 6th advanced Hip resurfacing course, Ghent, Belgium, May 2014.

Catherine Van Der Straeten1, Koen A De Smet2.   

Abstract

This paper reports the consensus of an international faculty of expert metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing surgeons, with a combined experience of over 40,000 cases, on the current status of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Indications, design and metallurgy issues, release of metal ions and adverse soft tissue reactions to particles, management of problematic cases and revisions, as well as required experience and training are covered. The overall consensus is that MoM hip resurfacing should not be banned and should be viewed separately from MoM total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a large diameter head because of the different design and wear behaviour related to the taper/trunnion connection. The use of hip resurfacing has decreased worldwide but specialist centres continue to advocate hip resurfacing in young and active male patients. Regarding age the general recommendation is to avoid hip resurfacing in men older than 65 and in women older than 55, depending on the patient activity and bone quality. Female gender is considered a relative contraindication. Most surgeons would not implant a MoM hip in women who would still like a child. Regardless of gender, there is a consensus not to perform hip resurfacing in case of a femoral head size smaller than 46 mm and in patients with renal insufficiency or with a known metal allergy. Regarding follow-up of hip resurfacing and detection of adverse local tissue reactions, metal ion measurements, MRI and ultrasound are advocated depending on the local expertise. The consensus is that hip resurfacing should be limited to high volume hip surgeons, who are experienced in hip resurfacing or trained to perform hip resurfacing in a specialist centre.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26449333     DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000288

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


  7 in total

1.  Medium term review of the ASR implant system: A single surgeon series.

Authors:  M Curtin; E Murphy; C Bryan; D Jadaan; M Jadaan; D Bergin; C G Murphy; W Curtin
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2017-02-03

2.  Hip resurfacing arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: Implant-specific outcomes and risk factors for failure.

Authors:  Chan-Woo Park; Seung-Jae Lim; Joo-Hwan Kim; Youn-Soo Park
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  Hip replacement in femoral head osteonecrosis: current concepts.

Authors:  Michelangelo Scaglione; Luca Fabbri; Fabio Celli; Francesco Casella; Giulio Guido
Journal:  Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab       Date:  2016-04-07

4.  Hard Chrome-Coated and Fullerene-Doped Metal Surfaces in Orthopedic Bearings.

Authors:  Robert Sonntag; Katja Feige; Claudia Beatriz Dos Santos; Jan Philippe Kretzer
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 3.623

5.  Lessons learnt from early failure of a patient trial with a polymer-on-polymer resurfacing hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Job L C Van Susante; Nico Verdonschot; L Paul A Bom; Pawel Tomaszewski; Pat Campbell; Edward Ebramzadeh; B Wim Schreurs
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 3.717

6.  A Comparative Cohort Study With a 20-Year Age Gap: Hip Resurfacing in Patients Aged ≤35 Years and Patients Aged ≥55 Years.

Authors:  Rachelle Morgenstern; Thomas Alastair Denova; Renee Ren; Edwin P Su
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2020-12-24

7.  Mid-term outcomes of the R3™ delta ceramic acetabular system in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Edward T Davis; Ville Remes; Petri Virolainen; Peter Gebuhr; Bart Van Backlé; Matthew P Revell; Branko Kopjar
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 2.359

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.