Abstract
Introduction
Uncertainties in the management of patients with MOM hip implants continue to be a problem for all surgeons. Guidelines vary and do not fully define or quantify thresholds. We aimed to assess the differences in decision-making amongst an international community of six specialist orthopaedic institutions.
Methods
Five international tertiary referral orthopaedic units (one UK, two USA, and two European) were invited to participate. Each unit organised an MDT panel consisting of 2 or more hip surgeons and a musculoskeletal radiologist. All units discussed the same 10 patients. A full clinical dataset was provided including blood test and all imaging. Differences in the interpretation of findings, management decision and rationale for decisions were compared between institutions.
Results
Asymptomatic patients with metal ions below 7ppb and intra-articular synovitis were collectively treated with monitoring and repeat ion measurement. Symptomatic patients with similar findings were recommended revision surgery by all units. Raised metal ions and a cystic pseudotumour on imaging that is palpable clinically was also consistently recommended revision surgery.
Moderate symptoms (OHS 30), 2B pseudotumour, and moderate metal ions (cobalt 5.5ppb) were seen as an indication for revision in 5 units, however the reverse is seen if the patient had several co-morbidities. Further to this, rising blood metal ions (6 to 7.5ppb) was recommended surgery by 4 units, and watchful waiting in 2 units. Rising blood metal ion levels (6ppb to 10ppb) and a small fluid collection on MRI in asymptomatic patients was recommended clinical review and repeat metal ions by 3 units, repeat MRI by 1 unit and revision for suboptimal implant position by the remaining 2 units.
Conclusion
Moderate symptoms, blood metal ions and cystic pseudotumours led to inconsistent agreement between institutions. Coordinated international guidance and MDT panel discussions are recommended to improve consensus in decision-making.
