Hip resurfacing arthroplasty in young patients: international high-volume centres’ report on the outcome of 11,382 metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasties in patients ⩽50 years at surgery

2020 ◽  
pp. 112070002095735
Author(s):  
Catherine Van Der Straeten
Keyword(s):  
Metal Ion ◽  
Articular Surface ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Implant Survivorship ◽  
Articular Surface Replacement ◽  
Tissue Reactions

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients younger than 50 years poses significant challenges including postoperative limitations of activity and higher failure rates. Sub-par outcomes of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in registries remain controversial due to multiple confounders. Favourable HRA results in some studies are often regarded as irreproducible. The aim of this study is to analyse HRA outcomes in a large international cohort. Patients and methods: We compiled a database of 11,382 HRA patients ⩽50 years from an international group of 27 experienced HRA centres from 13 countries. 18 different metal-on-metal (MoM) HRA designs were included with a mean follow-up of 7.6 years. Outcomes were implant survivorship, revision rates, causes for revision, clinical scores and metal ion levels. Outcomes were compared between genders, sizes, implant types and pre-operative diagnoses. Results: Overall cumulative Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 88.9% at 22 years (95% CI: 88.3–89.5%). 2 HRA designs (DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR), and Corin Cormet Hip Resurfacing System (CORMET)) led to inferior results while all others yielded similar survivorships. Excluding ASR and CORMET, implant survivorship in 11,063 cases was 95% at 10 years and 90% at 22 years. In men, implant survivorship was excellent: 99% at 10 years and 92.5% at 21 years. In females, implant survivorship was 90% at 10 years and 81.3% at 22 years. The overall revision rate was 3.6% with most common reasons for revision being implant loosening and adverse local tissue reactions. The best survivorship was found in patients with osteoarthritis (95% CI, 92.1–93.3% at 22 years), the poorest was among dysplastic hips (78.3%; 95% CI, 76.5–80.1% at 20 years, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Comparable revision rates demonstrated here may mitigate some concerns for safety and longevity of MoM HRA implants. Higher demands for activity and functionality in younger patients make HRA a potential alternative to THA.

scholarly journals Outcomes after the conversion of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty to ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty: A retrospective observational study with a mean 10-year follow-up

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiguang Yu ◽  
Mao Shuai ◽  
Jinluan Lin ◽  
Baomin Chen ◽  
Mingdong Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal Ion ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Ceramic On Ceramic

Abstract Background The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess clinical outcomes following failed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM-HRA) revised using ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty (CoC-THA) via the direct anterior approach (DAA).Methods Data involving 112 patients (112 hips) with failed primary MoM-HRA that was revised using CoC-THA via the DAA during 2006 - 2018 were retrospectively analysed. The mean age was 54.6 years (45–63 years). Frequent surgical indications for conversion were aseptic loosening and femoral neck fracture. The primary endpoint was the Postel-Merle d’Aubigne functional score (PMA). Secondary endpoints were the major orthopaedic complication rate and serum metal ion levels (chromium and cobalt).Results The mean follow-up time was 10 years (range, 4 - 13 years). The mean PMA improved from 9 (4-14) to 16 (13-18) (p = 0.001). Six patients had undergone a re-revision intervention. Fourteen incidents of aseptic loosening and four periprosthetic fractures were observed. A consistent decline in mean serum metal ion levels was detected [chromium decreased from 36.6 μg/L (12.5-76.5 μg/L) prior to conversion to 2.6 μg/L (0.1-13.5 μg/L) at final follow-up (p = 0.001), cobalt decreased from 37.5 μg/L (6.7-93.2 μg/L) to 2.2 μg/L (1.2-18.4 μg/L) (p =0.003)].Conclusion Failed primary MoM-HRA converted to CoC-THA using the DAA yielded acceptable clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Living with a recalled implant: a qualitative study of patients’ experiences with ASR hip resurfacing arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Bitar ◽  
Ferid Krupic ◽  
Li Felländer-Tsai ◽  
Sead Crnalic ◽  
Per Wretenberg
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare System ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
High Complication Rate ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Articular Surface Replacement

Abstract Background Total hip arthroplasty is the traditional treatment for osteoarthritis in the hip joint. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty, with metal on metal bearing, is a modern concept initially developed mainly for young active people. The metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty implant, Articular Surface Replacement (ASR), was implanted in approximately 93,000 patients before it was recalled in 2010 due to a high complication rate. This study aimed to evaluate patients’ own experiences living with an implant that they knew had a high complication rate and had been recalled from the market. Methods A total of 14 patients, still living with the implant, of a cohort of 34 patients were available for follow-up. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 patients where a majority actively sought for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), and subsequently underwent HRA with an ASR prosthesis between 11/21/2006 and 09/28/2009. The responses were analyzed using content analysis described by Graneheim and Lundman to compress text and identify categories and subcategories. Results The results showed that most patients had already decided that they wanted a metal-on-metal HRA implant before meeting the surgeon. They expressed that the implant made it possible to live an active life. A majority did not think about the fact that they had a hip implant, because they lacked subjective pain. Most of the patients were positive about the annual exams at the hospital and wanted them to continue. None of them felt that their trust towards the healthcare system had changed after the implant recall. They expressed a belief that they would need new surgery sooner than they first thought. Conclusions Despite all the attention when the ASR prosthesis was recalled, patients with ASR-HRA did not report themselves negatively affected by the recall in this group of patients where a majority had actively sought for an HRA procedure. The healthcare system has an obligation to continue the annual exams, even if the implant provider does not continue reimbursement.

Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 637-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Shimmin ◽  
Paul E. Beaulé ◽  
Pat Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document