Aims

Metal particles detached from metal-on-metal hip prostheses (MoM-THA) have been shown to cause inflammation and destruction of tissues. To further explore this, we investigated the histopathology (aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesions (ALVAL) score) and metal concentrations of the periprosthetic tissues obtained from patients who underwent revision knee arthroplasty. We also aimed to investigate whether accumulated metal debris was associated with ALVAL-type reactions in the synovium.

Aims

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) has seen decreased usage due to safety and longevity concerns. Joint registries have highlighted the risks in females, smaller hips, and hip dysplasia. This study aimed to identify if reported risk factors are linked to revision in a long-term follow-up of MoM-HR performed by a non-designer surgeon.

Aims

This combined clinical and in vitro study aimed to determine the incidence of liner malseating in modular dual mobility (MDM) constructs in primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) from a large volume arthroplasty centre, and determine whether malseating increases the potential for fretting and corrosion at the modular metal interface in malseated MDM constructs using a simulated corrosion chamber.

Introduction. Numerous studies have reported on clinically significant volumes of material loss and corrosion at the head-stem junction of metal-on-metal (MOM) hips; less is understood about metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) hips. We compared the effect of bearing type (MOM vs MOP) on taper material loss for a hip system of a single design (DePuy Pinnacle). Methods. We recruited retrieved MOM (n=30) and MOP (n=22) bearing hips that were consecutively received at our centre. We prospectively collected associated clinical and imaging data. We measured the severity of corrosion and volumes of material loss at each head taper surface and used multivariate statistical analysis to investigate differences between the two bearing types. Results. The median rate of material loss for the MOM and MOP groups was 0.81 mm. 3. /year (0.01–3.45) and 0.03 mm. 3. /year (0–1.07) respectively (p<0.001). 29 out of 30 MOM hips were revised for adverse metal reactions, compared with 1 out of 22 MOP hips. Discussion. MOP hips lost significantly less material from their taper junctions than MOM hips. We suggest that the metal-metal interaction at the bearing surface of MOM hips enhances the corrosive environment at the head-stem junction. Conclusion. Our results can reassure patients with MOP Pinnacle hips that they are unlikely to experience clinically significant problems related to material loss from the taper junction

The evolution of orthopedic implants has witnessed a great evolution and allowed insights into the various metals and alloys compatible with the human body. However, some recent reports have raised concerns regarding hypersensitivity to several metals used in orthopedic implants. These cases are mostly documented in the field of arthroplasty. Metal ion release following hip or knee arthroplasty is a known phenomenon and associated immune reactions to these metal ions have been implicated in the causation of these hypersensitivity reactions. These reactions frequently lead to poor outcome following these implant surgeries. We here present two rare cases of metal induced hypersensitivity reactions following orthopedic surgeries. We have also reviewed the literature in this context to look into the various causes of metal reactions, types of implant involved in hypersensitivity, methods of testing and management options in these cases

Serum and blood cobalt (Co) and chromium (Cr) ion levels are used to monitor patients at risk for adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) following metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, these levels often do not correlate with the degree of local soft-tissue reaction and damage observed at the time of revision. The purpose of this study was to analyze synovial fluid metal ion concentrations in patients with a failed THA in the setting of an ARMD and determine if these levels can be more predictive of soft-tissue destruction than serum or whole blood levels. Synovial, blood and serum samples were prospectively collected from patients undergoing revision THA with ARMD (n=29) and those undergoing aseptic revision without ARMD (n=29). There was no difference in mean age (P=0.50), BMI (P=0.18), sex distribution (P=0.18), serum creatinine (P=0.74), or time to revision THA (P=0.13) between the cohorts. In the AMRD cohort, the components included MoM THA (n=18), hip resurfacing (n=5), dual-modular taper THA (n=4) and MoM and dual-modular taper THA (n=2). At the time of revision THA, 26 (90%) patients in the metal reaction cohort had gross evidence of metallosis in the soft-tissues, the remaining 3 (10%) had evidence of corrosion of the dual taper neck or MoM bearing. In the non ARMD cohort the bearing surfaces included metal-on-polyethylene (n=19) and ceramic-on-polyethylene (n=10). The indications for revision included isolated acetabular loosening (n=11), isolated femoral component loosening (n=11), polyethylene wear (n=5), recurrent dislocation (n=1) and combined femoral and acetabular component loosening (n=1). None had a clinical diagnosis or gross evidence of taper corrosion. Pre-revision, 21 (72%) patients in the metal reaction group had periarticular fluid collections or a mass on MRI. Mean cyst size was 202.9±71.6 cm3 and masses were grouped into Type I (cyst wall <3 mm, n=10), Type II (cyst wall ≥3 mm, n=8) and Type III (mainly solid, n=3). At the time of revision THA, the mean Co levels were elevated in patients with ARMD compared to those without in synovial fluid (1,833 ppb vs. 12.3 ppb, P=0.008), whole blood (22.6 ppb vs 0.5 ppb, P=0.005)) and serum (19.6 vs. 0.6, P=0.001). Likewise, mean Cr levels were significantly elevated in patients with an ARMD compared to those undergoing revision without in synovial fluid (3,128 ppb vs. 10.3 ppb, P=0.01), whole blood (8.9 ppb vs. 0.5 ppb, P=0.009) and serum (14.1 ppb vs. 0.5 ppb, P=0.005). The synovial fluid Co levels were the most accurate test for detecting pseudotumor (AUC 0.951) and adverse local tissue reaction (AUC 0.826). At a synovial fluid Cr level of 110 ppb, the synovial fluid metal ion analysis was 94% sensitive and 86% specific for pseudotumor formation. In this prospective study, synovial fluid analysis of metal ion levels was more accurate in predicting the presence and extent of pseudo-tumor or ALTR compared to blood or serum analysis. The addition of synovial aspiration with metal ion analysis may provide another helpful data point when risk stratifying these patients for need for revision THA

Aims

We present a case series of five patients who had revision surgery following magnetic controlled growing rods (MGCR) for early onset scoliosis. Metallosis was found during revision in four out of five patients and we postulated a mechanism for rod failure based on retrieval analysis.

Introduction. In recent years, an increasing number of reports related to adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) following metal-on-metal (MOM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been published. Some patients who experience ARMD require revision surgery. Objectives. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the mid-term results of MOM THA. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent THA at JCHO Saitama medical center from January 2007 to December 2010. A metal liner and metal femoral head were used in 37 of 214 cases (17%). This sub-group comprised 2 men and 35 women (mean age at surgery, 63.5 years; range, 39–79 years). The original disease is 28 osteoarthritis, 5 osteonecrosis, 3 rheumatoid arthritis and 1 rapidly destructive hip coxarthropathy. We investigated the system type, size (cup, femoral head, and stem), and cup position (anteversion and inclination). Moreover, we used imaging (radiography and computed tomography [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MR]) to assess for aseptic loosening, metal hypersensitivity reactions, and pseudotumor formation. Results. Six women with osteoarthritis experienced significant localized soft tissue reactions, and underwent revision. The average duration to revision was 41months(range, 28–63). Of these, 4 patients had received the PINNACLE cup system (Depuy; 4/14, 28.6%) and 2 had received the M2a-Taper cup system (BIOMET; 2/23, 8.7%). The femoral head sizes of the PINNACLE system used was 36 mm, and the femoral head sizes of the M2q-Taper systems used were 28mm and 32mm. Four patients had no signs or symptoms, 1 patient complained of anterior thigh dullness and 1 patient had a dislocation. The average cup anteversion was 15.7 degrees (range, 10–19 degrees) and the average inclination was 49.2 degrees (range, 43–57 degrees). Conclusions. MOM THA was associated with a higher incidence of revision. The majority of cases that required revision had no severe signs or symptoms. Therefore, all cases of MOM THA should be assessed periodically using CT or MRI

BACKGROUND. The most common salvage of a failed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is to remove both the femoral and acetabular resurfacing components and perform a total hip replacement. The other choices are to perform an acetabular or femoral only revision. A one or two piece acetabular component or a polyethylene bipolar femoral component that matches the retained metal resurfacing acetabular component is used. The considerations in favor of performing a one component resurfacing revision are maintaining the natural femoral head size, limiting the surgical effort for the patient and surgeon, and bone conservation. There are often favorable cost considerations with single component revision surgery. The reasons for femoral component revision are femoral neck fracture, femoral component loosening and an adverse reaction to metal wear debris. Performing a femoral component only revision requires a well fixed and well oriented acetabular component. Acetabular revision is most often performed for an adverse reaction to metal wear debris or loosening. METHODS. 81 acetabular revisions and 46 femoral revisions were evaluated 4 to 14 years after surgery. 83% of patients had their initial surgery at outside institutions. The mean age was 46 and 65% of patients were women. A two piece titanium backed polyethylene component was used in 44 patients and a one or two piece metal component was used in 37. A dual mobility femoral prosthesis mated to a retained metal acetabular component was used for the femoral revisions and no conversions to a metal-on-metal total hip replacement were performed. We selected polyethylene acetabular components for patients with adverse reactions to metal wear debris if their femoral component was less than 48 mm or if there was no matching metal acetabular component available for their femoral component. We used dual mobility components for femoral loosening, femoral neck fractures and adverse reactions to metal wear debris in patients with well-fixed and well oriented metal acetabular components. Dual mobility components were also used if there are any concerns about the femoral component or in some older patients. We performed one component revisions rather than conversion to total hip replacement on 88% of patients presenting with failed resurfacing prostheses. RESULTS. There were no failures with polyethylene acetabular components. There were two failures due to ongoing adverse metal reactions in patients receiving metal revision acetabular components. There was one failure with a dual mobility prosthesis due to accelerated polyethylene wear from undetected edge loading on a retained worn metal acetabular component. There were two infections and one patient with continued pain. There were no dislocations. The average Harris Hip Score was 94. The UCLA activity score was 6 or greater for all but 4 patients. There were 6 revisions to total hip replacement. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 94%. 95% of patients rated their outcome as excellent or good. CONCLUSIONS. Failed metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prostheses can be successfully revised without conversion to total hip replacement in most instances. A detailed knowledge of matching prostheses is necessary. Polyethylene prostheses for the acetabular or femoral reconstruction are often needed

The December 2015 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Vitamin E infusion helpful in polyethylene; Hip replacement in fracture and arthritis; Non-surgical treatment for arthritis; Cost and approach in hip surgery; Who does well in FAI surgery?; AAOS Thromboembolism guidelines; Thromboprophylaxis and periprosthetic joint infection; Fluid collections not limited to metal-on-metal THR

Hip simulator studies have shown reduced hip offset can cause microseparation and increased wear in hard-on-hard hip bearings. However this has not been analysed yet in vivo. We studied the effect of reduced hip offset on serum metal ion levels in patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) hip arthroplasty. From all patients who underwent unilateral MoM bearing hip arthroplasty between 2005 and 2009, 63 patients had complete clinical evaluation, measurement of serum chromium and cobalt ion levels as well as biomechanical measurements on pre- and post operative radiographs (cup inclination, head inclination, change in hip offset and change in hip length.). Ten arthroplasties were revised due to adverse metal reaction and six patients awaiting revision. 55% of ASR hips showed higher metal ions (>7 ppb) whereas only 15% of non-ASR hips had higher ion levels. Patients with reduced postoperative hip offset by more than 5 mm had significantly higher mean metal ion levels compared to the the rest of the hips (31.8 ppb vs. 7.4 ppb, p=0.002). On subgroup analysis this effect was present in non-ASR hips (18.7 ppb vs. 4.7 ppb, p=0.025) but was not significant in ASR hips (29.6 ppb vs. 16.3 ppb, p=0.347). Our study demonstrated significantly higher serum metal ion levels in patients who lost more than 5 mm hip offset after arthroplasty. Reduced soft tissue tension leading to microseparation of the articulation and edge loading is a theoretical explanation for this effect. This may be relevant in other hard bearings such as ceramic-on-ceramic as well

We report a 12- to 15-year implant survival assessment of a prospective single-surgeon series of Birmingham Hip Resurfacings (BHRs). The earliest 1000 consecutive BHRs including 288 women (335 hips) and 598 men (665 hips) of all ages and diagnoses with no exclusions were prospectively followed-up with postal questionnaires, of whom the first 402 BHRs (350 patients) also had clinical and radiological review.

Mean follow-up was 13.7 years (12.3 to 15.3). In total, 59 patients (68 hips) died 0.7 to 12.6 years following surgery from unrelated causes. There were 38 revisions, 0.1 to 13.9 years (median 8.7) following operation, including 17 femoral failures (1.7%) and seven each of infections, soft-tissue reactions and other causes. With revision for any reason as the end-point Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed 97.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.9 to 97.9) and 95.8% (95% CI 95.1 to 96.5) survival at ten and 15 years, respectively. Radiological assessment showed 11 (3.5%) femoral and 13 (4.1%) acetabular radiolucencies which were not deemed failures and one radiological femoral failure (0.3%).

Our study shows that the performance of the BHR continues to be good at 12- to 15-year follow-up. Men have better implant survival (98.0%; 95% CI 97.4 to 98.6) at 15 years than women (91.5%; 95% CI 89.8 to 93.2), and women < 60 years (90.5%; 95% CI 88.3 to 92.7) fare worse than others. Hip dysplasia and osteonecrosis are risk factors for failure. Patients under 50 years with osteoarthritis fare best (99.4%; 95% CI 98.8 to 100 survival at 15 years), with no failures in men in this group.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1298–1306.

The June 2014 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Modular femoral necks: early signs are not good; is corrosion to blame for modular neck failures; metal-on-metal is not quite a closed book; no excess failures in fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures; noise no problem in hip replacement; heterotopic ossification after hip arthroscopy: are NSAIDs the answer?; thrombotic and bleeding events surprisingly low in total joint replacement; and the elephant in the room: complications and surgical volume.

The October 2013 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Young and impinging; Clothes, weather and femoral heads?; Go long, go cemented; Surgical repair of the abductors?; Aspirin for DVT prophylaxis?; Ceramic-on-polyethylene: a low-wear solution?; ALVAL and ASR™: the story continues….; Salvaging Legg-Calve-Perthes’ disease