There have been no large comparative studies of the blood levels of metal ions after implantation of commercially available hip resurfacing devices which have taken into account the effects of femoral size and inclination and anteversion of the acetabular component. We present the results in 90 patients with unilateral articular surface replacement (ASR) hip resurfacings (mean time to blood sampling 26 months) and 70 patients with unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) implants (mean time 47 months).
Many of the reasons not to perform hip resurfacing are based upon fear: fear of fracture, fear of difficulty of the technique, fear of metal reactivity and sensitivity. I implore you that we should not allow fear to triumph over reason
The results of conventional hip replacement in young patients with osteoarthritis have not been encouraging even with improvements in the techniques of fixation and in the bearing surfaces. Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing was introduced as a less invasive method of joint reconstruction for this particular group.
Conclusions There is a small but significant increased risk of revision with uncemented rather than cemented total hip replacement, and a small but significant increased risk of death with cemented procedures.
The suit was filed in Bergen County, New Jersey Superior Court, by Searcy Denney and Weitz & Luxenberg on behalf of plaintiffs Dianne and Phillip Pingel. The plaintiffs allege that the defendant was negligent and failed to use reasonable care for the safety and well-being of patients in the development, testing, marketing, packaging, and selling of the defective product.
The success of total hip replacement (THR) in the 20th century has been tremendous with improvements in the durability of new designs, bearing materials and fixation techniques. However, the young and active patients have historically had high revision rates compared with older, more sedentary patients, notably when the etiology of the disease is osteonecrosis. Despite great improvements in cementless stem fixation, hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has the advantages of replicating leg length and offset, and maintaining proximal bone unlike THR. Moreover, dislocation in THR remains a problem when small femoral heads are used. Resurfacing patients also do not report thigh pain as it sometimes happens after THR.
A recently recalled artificial hip made by a unit of Johnson & Johnson, designed to last 15 years or more, is failing worldwide at unusually high rates after just a few years.
We performed 96 Birmingham resurfacing arthroplasties of the hip in 71 consecutive patients with avascular necrosis of the femoral head. A modified neck-capsule-preserving approach was used which is described in detail.
Early resection of heterotopic ossification after total hip arthroplasty: A review of the literature
Early excision of heterotopic ossification was performed in 8 patients at an average of 10.2 months after total hip arthroplasty. All patients received a single irradiation dose of 7Gy the day before the operation, followed by oral indomethacin (3x25mg/day) for six weeks. Continuous passive mobilization under epidural anesthesia was started immediately post-operatively.
For age-matched women, the mean outside diameter of the Birmingham hip resurfacing acetabular components was 2.03 mm less than that of the acetabular components in the uncemented total hip replacements (p < 0.0001).
This voluntary recall was initiated due to the potential risks associated with modular-neck stems. These risks include the potential for fretting and/or corrosion at or about the modular-neck junction, which may result in adverse local tissue reactions manifesting with pain and/or swelling. Please see the FAQs below for more information.
MANCHESTER Researchers reported that adverse soft tissue reactions following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty are typically due to increased wear of the bearing surfaces, and patients with smaller femoral heads may be particularly susceptible to these complications.