Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 472, Issue 2, pp 489–496 | Cite as

Does Femoral Neck to Cup Impingement Affect Metal Ion Levels in Hip Resurfacing?

  • Michel J. Le Duff
  • Alicia J. Johnson
  • Andrew J. Wassef
  • Harlan C. Amstutz
Symposium: 2013 Hip Society Proceedings

Abstract

Background

Impingement of the femoral neck with the acetabular component after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a possible cause of edge loading and accelerated bearing wear. No attempt has been made to correlate radiographic impingement signs and blood metal ion levels.

Questions/purposes

We (1) compared serum cobalt (CoS) and chromium (CrS) concentrations between patients with and without radiographic impingement signs treated with unilateral HRA, (2) determined whether divot depth on the femoral neck correlated with CoS and CrS, and (3) assessed the predictive value of radiographic impingement signs for high levels of CoS and CrS.

Methods

A retrospective radiographic review of 141 patients with CoS and CrS analyses yielded 21 patients with and 120 without radiographic impingement signs (controls). Radiographic measurements included divot depth and orientation of the acetabular component to compute the contact patch to rim distance, a measure of functional head coverage. We defined a patient as having radiographic impingement signs if a remodeling of the femoral neck cortex showed a depression matching the predicted path of an impinging acetabular component. CoS and CrS were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and the radiographs were taken within 12 months of the last blood draw.

Results

Median CoS and CrS were greater in the impingement group than in controls in patients with less than 10-mm contact patch to rim distances. Divot depth did not correlate with CoS or CrS. In predicting elevated ion levels (≥ 7 μg/L), the presence of a radiographic impingement sign showed a sensitivity of 50% for CoS and 33% for CrS and a specificity of 87% for both CoS and CrS.

Conclusions

Radiographic impingement signs influenced CoS and CrS only when the functional head coverage was insufficient due to poor socket positioning. Radiographic impingement signs alone were not a good predictor of elevated metal ion levels.

Level of Evidence

Level III, diagnostic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

References

  1. 1.
    Amstutz HC. “Top 10” technical pearls for successfully performing hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Tech Orthop. 2010;25:73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amstutz HC, Beaulé PE, Dorey FJ, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Gruen TA. Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty—surgical technique. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2006;88:234–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amstutz HC, Campbell PA, Dorey FJ, Johnson AJ, Skipor A, Jacobs JJ. Do ion concentrations after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing increase over time? A prospective study. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:695–700.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ. Background of metal-on-metal resurfacing. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2006;220:85–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ, Campbell PA, Dorey FJ. The effects of technique changes on aseptic loosening of the femoral component in hip resurfacing: results of 600 Conserve Plus with a 3–9 year follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:481–489.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ, Johnson AJ. Socket position determines hip resurfacing 10-year survivorship. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:3127–3133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Back DL, Young DA, Shimmin AJ. How do serum cobalt and chromium levels change after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;438:177–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ball ST, Schmalzried TP. Posterior femoroacetabular impingement (PFAI)—after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2009;67:173–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bergmann G, Deuretzbacher G, Heller M, Graichen F, Rohlmann A, Strauss J, Duda GN. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech. 2001;34:859–871.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Biedermann R, Tonin A, Krismer M, Rachbauer F, Eibl G, Stockl B. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:762–769.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grigoris P, Roberts P, Panousis K, Bosch H. The evolution of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:125–134.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gruen TA, Le Duff MJ, Wisk LE, Amstutz HC. Prevalence and clinical relevance of radiographic signs of impingement in metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1519–1526.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heisel C, Streich N, Krachler M, Jakubowitz E, Kretzer JP. Characterization of the running-in period in total hip resurfacing arthroplasty: an in vivo and in vitro metal ion analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:125–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson CR. A new method for roentgenographic examination of the upper end of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg. 1932;14:859–866.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Langton DJ, Joyce TJ, Mangat N, Lord J, Van Orsouw M, De Smet K, Nargol AV. Reducing metal ion release following hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2011;42:169–180.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Langton DJ, Sprowson AP, Joyce TJ, Reed M, Carluke I, Partington P, Nargol AV. Blood metal ion concentrations after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a comparative study of articular surface replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:1287–1295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Langton DJ, Sprowson AP, Mahadeva D, Bhatnagar S, Holland JP, Nargol AV. Cup anteversion in hip resurfacing: validation of EBRA and the presentation of a simple clinical grading system. J Arthroplasty. 2009;25:607–613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leslie IJ, Williams S, Isaac G, Ingham E, Fisher J. High cup angle and microseparation increase the wear of hip surface replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2259–2265.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lim SJ, Kim JH, Moon YW, Park YS. Femoroacetabular cup impingement after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27:60–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    MacDonald SJ, McCalden RW, Chess DG, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Cleland D, Leung F. Metal-on-metal versus polyethylene in hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:282–296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Matthies A, Underwood R, Cann P, Ilo K, Nawaz Z, Skinner J, Hart AJ. Retrieval analysis of 240 metal-on-metal hip components, comparing modular total hip replacement with hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:307–314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Medical Device Alert. All metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements (MDA/2012/008). Available at: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/dts-bs/documents/medicaldevicealert/con143787.pdf. Accessed October 12, 2012.
  23. 23.
    Morlock MM, Bishop N, Zustin J, Hahn M, Ruther W, Amling M. Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:89–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pulos N, Tiberi JV 3rd, Schmalzried TP. Measuring acetabular component position on lateral radiographs—ischio-lateral method. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2011;69(suppl 1):S84–S89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Savarino L, Granchi D, Ciapetti G, Cenni E, Nardi Pantoli A, Rotini R, Veronesi C, Baldini N, Giunti A. Ion release in patients with metal-on-metal hip bearings in total joint replacement: a comparison with metal-on-polyethylene bearings. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63:467–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Skipor AK, Campbell PA, Paterson LM, Amstutz HC, Schmalzried TP, Jacobs JJ. Serum and urine metal levels in patients with metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2002;13:1227–1234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tiberi JV, Pulos N, Kertzner M, Schmalzried TP. A more reliable method to assess acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:471–476.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Underwood RJ, Zografos A, Sayles RS, Hart AJ, Cann P. Edge loading in metal-on-metal hips: low clearance is a new risk factor. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2012;226:217–226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van Der Straeten C, Grammatopoulos G, Gill HS, Calistri A, Campbell P, De Smet KA. The 2012 Otto Aufranc Award. The interpretation of metal ion levels in unilateral and bilateral hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yoo MC, Cho YJ, Chun YS, Rhyu KH. Impingement between the acetabular cup and the femoral neck after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:99–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yoon JP, Le Duff MJ, Johnson AJ, Takamura KM, Ebramzadeh E, Amstutz HC. Contact patch to rim distance predicts metal ion levels in hip resurfacing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:1615–1621.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michel J. Le Duff
    • 1
  • Alicia J. Johnson
    • 1
  • Andrew J. Wassef
    • 1
  • Harlan C. Amstutz
    • 1
  1. 1.Joint Replacement InstituteSt Vincent Medical CenterLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations