Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: correlation between clinical and radiological assessment, metal ions and ultrasound findings

  • Original Article
  • Published:
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

We report the clinical, radiological and wear analysis of 52 consecutive MoM hip resurfacings (performed on 49 younger patients) to a mean follow-up of 9.2 years.

Methods

Every patient underwent X-ray and clinical evaluation (HHS). Ultrasonography of the hip was performed in all patients in order to identify possible cystic or solid mass in periprosthetic tissue. In case of mass >20 mm, further MRI was performed to better analyse the characteristics of lesion.

Results

Five patients (five hips) had a revision. The overall survival rate was 90.38 %. The average HHS at follow-up examination was 95.5 points. No progressive radiolucent areas and no sclerosis or osteolysis around the implants were found. The US and RMI imaging showed a pseudotumour formation in two patients (correlated with high metal ion levels in blood and urine), both asymptomatic.

Conclusion

A significant positive correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and serum metal ion levels was found (r = 0.64 and r = 0.62 for cobalt and chromium, respectively).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shimmin Andrew, Baulè PaulE, Campbell Pat (2008) Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:637–654

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chan FW, Bobyn JD, Medley JB, Krygier JJ, Tanzen M (1999) Wear and lubrication of metal-on-metal hip implants. Clin Orthop 369:10–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brodner W, Bitzan P, Meisinger V, et al (1997) Elevated serum cobalt with metal-on-metal articulating surfaces. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 79-B:316–321

  4. Daniel J, Ziaee H, Pradhan C, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJ (2007) Blood and urine metal ion levels in young and active patients after BHR arthroplasty: four year results of prospective longitudinal study. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 89-B:169–173

  5. Sansone Valerio, Pagani Davide, Melato Marco (2013) The effects on bone cells of metal ions released from orthopaedic implants. A review. Clin Cases Mineral Bone Metab 10(1):34–40

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P, Gundle R, Whitwell D, Gibbons CL, Ostlere S, Athanasou N, Gill HS, Murray DW (2008) Pseudotumors associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg 90B:847–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A, et al (2005) Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints: a clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2005;87-A:28–36

  8. Watters TS, Cardona DM, Menon KS et al (2010) Aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesions: a clinicopathologic review of an underrecognized cause of prosthetic failure. Am J Clin Pathol 134:886–893

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mont MA, Schmalzried TP (2008) Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: important observations from the first ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90-A(Suppl 3):3–11

  10. MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) (2010) Medical device alert 2010/069 7 September 2010

  11. Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of THR hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty: an end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 51-A:737–755

  12. Amstuz HC, Baulè Pe, Dorey FJ et al (2004) Metal on metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six year follow up study. J Bone Joint Surg 86A:28–39

  13. DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop 121:20–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. De Smet KA, Pattyn C, Verdonk R (2002) Early results of primary hip resurfacing using a hybrid metal-on-metal couple. Hip 12:158–162

    Google Scholar 

  15. Takamura KM, Yoon J, Ebramzadeh E, Campbell PA, Amstutz HC (2011) Incidence and significance of femoral neck narrowing in the first 500 Conserve® Plus series of hip resurfacing cases: a clinical and histologic study. Orthop Clin North Am 42:181–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lieske S, John M, Rimasch C, et al (2008) Dislocation as a rare complication of resurfacing of the hip joint: case report and metaanalysis. Unfallchirurg

  17. Mont MA, Marker DR, Smith JM, Ulrich SD, McGrath SM (2008) Resurfacing is comparable to total hip arthroplasty at short-term follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res 23(6 Suppl 1):9–44

  18. Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA, Wisk LE (2010) Clinical and radiographic results of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92-A:2663–2671

  19. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Shears E, Pynsent PB (2011) Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 93-B:27–33

  20. Shimmin AJ, Walter WL, Esposito C (2010) The influence of the size of the component on the outcome of resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 92-B:469–476

  21. Shimmin AJ, Bare J, Back DL (2005) Complication associated with hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Clin Orthop North Am 36:187–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Stulberg BN, Trier KK, Naughton M et al (2008) Results and lessons learned from a United States hip resurfacing investigational device exemption trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(Suppl 3):21–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Richards CJ, Giannitsios D, Huk OL et al (2008) Risk of periprosthetic femoral neck fracture after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: valgus compared with anatomic alignment. A biomechanical and clinical analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(Suppl 3):96–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Haddad FS, Thakrar RR, Hart AJ et al (2011) Metal-on-metal bearings: the evidence so far. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:572–579

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. De Haan R, Pattyn C, Gill HS, Murray DW, Campbell PA, De Smet K (2008) Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(10):1291–1297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Haddad FS, Thakrar RR, Hart AJ et al (2011) Metal-on-metal bearings: the evidence so far. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:572–579

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fitts SM, Zadzilka JD, Trier K, Stulberg BN (2008) Resurfacing arthroplasty for patients with osteonecrosis [abstract].In: Proceedings of the 75th annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2008 March 5–9. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Rosemont, IL, pp 409–410

  28. Bitsch RG, Zamorano M, Loidolt T, Heisel C, Jacobs JJ, Schmalzried TP (2007) Ion production and excretion in a patient with a metal-on-metal bearing hip prosthesis. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:2758–2763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lamson DW, Plaza SM (2002) The safety and efficacy of high-dose chromium. Altern Med Rev 7(3):218–235

  30. Barreca S, Ciriaco L, Ferlazzo M, Rosa A (2014) Mechanical and biological results of short-stem hip implants: consideration on a series of 74 cases. Musculoskelet Surg. 2014 Jun 27 [Epub ahead of print]

  31. Hart AJ, Skinner JA, Henckel J, Sampson B, Gordon F (2011) Insufficient acetabular version increases blood metal ion levels after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(9):2590–2597

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hart AJ, Muirhead-Allwood S, Porter M, Matthies A, Ilo K, Maggiore P, Underwood R, Cann P, Cobb J, Skinner JA (2013) Which factors determine the wear rate of large-diameter metal-on-metal hip replacements? Multivariate analysis of two hundred and seventy-six components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(8):678–685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, Ed 3, 56100, Pisa, Italy

    M. Scaglione, L. Fabbri, N. Bianchi, D. Dell’Omo & G. Guido

Authors
  1. M. Scaglione
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Fabbri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Bianchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. Dell’Omo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. G. Guido
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Scaglione.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scaglione, M., Fabbri, L., Bianchi, N. et al. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: correlation between clinical and radiological assessment, metal ions and ultrasound findings. Musculoskelet Surg 99, 45–53 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-014-0344-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-014-0344-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation