Introduction: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has gained popularity as an alternative to THR for younger patients with osteoarthritis. A growing concern has been the association of MoMHRA with the development of inflammatory pseudotumours (IP), especially in women. These have been linked to metal-on-metal wear, which can be related to metal ion concentrations. Elevated metal wear debris levels may result from impingement, rim contact and edge loading. Head-neck ratio (HNR) is a predetermining factor for range of movement and impingement. Neck thinning is a recognised phenomenon post-MoMHRA and we have found an association of IP with increased neck thinning based on a case control study. Our aims were to identify HNR changes a hip undergoes when resurfaced and at follow up; and whether greater neck thinning at follow-up could be associated with the presence of elevated metal ions.

Methods: A cohort of 91 patients (57M:34F) with unilateral MoMHRAs were included in this study. Blood tests were obtained at a mean follow up of 3.9 years (range 1.7–7 years) and serum (Co:Cr) ion levels were measured (ICPMS). High metal ion concentrations were defined as Co> 4.1ppb and Cr> 5.2ppb. For all patients, head-neck ratio (HNR) was measured on plain anterio-posterior pelvic radiographs pre-operatively, immediately post-operatively and at follow-up.

Results: Female patients had significantly bigger HNR pre-op (mean=1.35, range:1.22–1.64) compared to males(mean=1.22, range:1.05–1.38) (p< 0.01). Immediately post-op, female HNRs (mean: 1.26, range: 1.14–1.34) were not different to male patients(mean=1.24, range=1.11–1.38) (p=0.11). At follow-up HNR was once again significantly bigger (p< 0.01) in females (mean=1.35, range: 1.21–1.49), compare to males (mean=1.27, range:1.11–1.38). HNR alterations with operation (p=0.00) and at follow-up (p< 0.01) were significantly bigger in female patients. Furthermore, there was a significant correlation between high ion levels and HNR change at follow-up for both Co (p=0.02) and Cr (p< 0.01).

Conclusion: This study identified gender-specific changes in HNR that resurfaced hips undergo, not previously documented. Female hips have greater HNR pre-operatively, compared to male hips, and appear to be biomechanically disadvantaged when resurfaced. A decrease in HNR with resurfacing could result in impingement and lead to processes, known to be more prevalent in females, such as neck thinning, increased wear and IP development. In addition, we highlight a correlation between high ion levels and greater neck thinning at follow-up. Increased neck thinning in symptomatic MoMHRA hips could be secondary to increased wear and should be investigated further radiologically for the presence of IP.

Introduction: Metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has become an alternative option to THR in the treatment of young adults with OA. A recognised MoMHRA complication is the development of an inflammatory pseudotumour (IP). IPs can be cystic (predominantly posterio-laterally located), solid (mostly anteriorly located) or mixed in nature. Diagnosis is made with the aid of US and/or MRI. To-date, no radiographic aid in the diagnosis of IP has been identified. Neck thinning is a recognised phenomenon following MoMHRA, occurring in up to 90% of resurfaced hips, which has not been associated with any adverse clinical events. Its pathogenesis is considered multi-factorial secondary to stress shielding, impingement, pressure effect on cancellous femoral neck, bone necrosis secondary to femoral preparation and altered vascularity/AVN. Our aim was to establish whether neck thinning is associated with the presence of a pseudotumour.

Methods: Thirty-one hips (30 patients) with IP confirmed clinically, radiologically, intra-operatively and histologically were matched for sex, age, pre-operative diagnosis, component size and follow-up with an asymptomatic MoMHRA cohort without pseudotumour (Control n=60). Radiological and operative findings at the time of revision of all IP patients were reviewed regarding location of pseudotumour; 4 different locations were defined: anteriorly-extending, posteriorly-extending, anteriorly & posteriorly-extending and within joint only. For all patients, prosthesis-neck ratio (PNR) at follow-up was measured on plain AP pelvic radiographs as previously described and validated.

Results: All IP patients (6M:24F) and all (12M:48F) but two controls had a posterior approach at the time of MoMHRA. Mean femoral component size was 46 mm for both groups. At an average follow up of 3.5 years (0.7–8.3), IP patients (mean 1.26, 1.10–1.79) had a significantly higher (p< 0.0001) PNR in comparison to their controls (mean 1.14, 1.03–1.35). Greater neck thinning had occurred in both IP-males (p< 0.001) and IP-females (p=0.002) in comparison to their controls. Location of IP and hence nature did not appear to have an effect on the degree of neck thinning.

Discussion: This study shows that IP patients had significantly narrower femoral necks at follow-up. Processes, such as impingement and increased wear that are thought to contribute to the process of neck narrowing are also thought to be factors in IP development. Furthermore, the presence of an IP, could lead to altered vascularity via a mass effect and further contribute to neck narrowing. Interestingly, nature of IP did not have a significantly affect PNR. Although one cannot be certain whether neck narrowing is a consequence or a contributing factor for IP development, their association is significant. Surgeons should consider the possibility of pseudotumour in symptomatic MoMHRA patients with neck narrowing.

Introduction: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has gained popularity as an alternative to THR for younger patients with osteoarthritis. A growing concern has been the association of MoMHRA with the development of inflammatory pseudotumours (IP), especially in women. These have been linked to metal-on-metal wear, which can be related to metal ion concentrations. Although cup orientation has been shown to influence wear, the optimum cup position has not been clearly defined. We have identified an optimal cup orientation to minimise IP risk, based on a case controlled study, for inclination/anteversion within ±10° of 40°/20°. Our aim was to see if this optimal position results in lower metal ions, and to identify the boundary of an optimal placement zone for low wear.

Methods: A cohort of 104 patients (60M: 44F) with unilateral MoMHRA was included in this study. Blood tests were obtained at a mean follow up of 3.9 years (range 1.7–7 years) and serum Co and Cr ion levels were measured (ICPMS). High metal ion concentrations were defined as Co> 4.1ppb and Cr> 5.2ppb. Radiographic cup inclination and anteversion were measured using EBRA. The differences in ion levels between different cup orientation zones were investigated. Three orientation zones were defined centered on the target orientation of 40°/20°: Z1 within ±5°, Z2 outside ±5°/within ±10° and Z3: within ±10°.

Results: There was a wide range of cup placements; mean inclination/anteversion were 46.3°(21.5°–64.6°)/15°(2.7°–35.6°). Cr levels, but not Co, were higher in female patients (p=0.002) and those with small femoral components (< 50mm, p =0.03).

For the whole cohort, there was no significant difference in ion levels (Cr: p=0.092. Co=0.075) between cups positioned within Z3 (n=58) versus those outside (n=46 mean). Male patients with cups within Z3 (n=27) had lower ion levels in comparison to those outside Z3, which were significantly lower for Co (p=0.049) but not Cr (p=0.084). Female patients had similar levels within and out of Z3 for both ions (Cr: p=0.83, Co: p=0.84). However, patients with cups within Z1 (n=13) had significantly lower Co (p=0.005) and Cr (p=0.001) than those outside Z1 (n=95). Interestingly, Co levels were significantly lower in Z1 (n=13) in comparison to Z2 (n=33) (p=0.048) but Cr levels were not different (p=0.06).

Discussion: MoMHRA cups placed with ±5° of the ideal position of 40°/20°gave rise to significantly lower metal ions indicating lower wear within this narrow zone, in both sexes. This safe zone, could be extended to ±10° for male patients only. Gender specific factors, such as pelvic anatomy and joint flexibility, could be responsible for the narrower ‘safe’ zone seen in females. The narrower safe zone coupled with smaller components implanted are factors contributing to higher ion levels and hence the increased incidence of IP seen in females.

Introduction: The development of Inflammatory Pseudotumour (IP) is a recognised complication following Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (MoMHRA), thought to occur secondary to wear and elevated ion levels. Studies have shown that acetabular component orientation influences the wear of metal-on-metal hip replacement bearings. The aims of this study were to investigate the significance of cup orientation in the development of IP, and to identify a ‘safe-zone’ for cup placement with lower-risk for IP development.

Methods: Twenty six patients (n=27 hips) with IP confirmed radiologically, intra-operatively and histologically were matched for sex, age, pre-operative diagnosis, component size and follow-up with a cohort of asymptomatic MoMHRA patients (Control n=58). Radiographic acetabular anteversion and inclination were measured using EBRA. We calculated the distance in degree space of each acetabular component from the optimum position of 40° inclination and 20° anteversion, recommended by the designers, and thus compared acetabular component position between the two groups. Three different zones were tested as possibly optimum for acetabular placement. These were Lewinneck’s Zone (LZ) (inclination/anteversion; 30–50°/5–25°), and two zones defined by ±5° (Zone 1) or ± 10° (Zone 2) about the suggested target of 40°/20°. An optimal placement zone was determined based on a significant difference in IP incidence between components in the zone versus those outside.

Results: There was a wide range in cup orientations; mean inclination and anteversion were similar in the two groups: IP 47.5° (10.1°–80.6°)/14.1° (4.1°–33.6°) Vs Control 46.1° (28.8°–59.8°)/15.6° (4.3°–32.9°). Acetabular components in the IP group were significantly further away from the optimum position of 40°/20° in comparison to the controls (p=0.023). There was no difference in IP incidence between cups positioned within (IP:13/27, Control:35/58) or out of LZ (p=0.09) and within (IP: 2/27, Control: 10/58) or out of Zone 1 (p=0.156). Cups placed in Zone 2 (IP:6/27, Control:27/58) had significantly lower IP incidence versus those outside this zone (p=0.01). The odd’s ratio of developing IP when the cup is positioned out-of Zone 2 was 3.7.

Discussion: This study highlights the importance of ace-tabular component orientation in IP development. On the whole, patients with pseudotumour had acetabular components that were further away from the optimum position in comparison to the controls. However, a small number of IP patients had well-placed components implying that additional factors, possibly patient and/or gender specific, are involved in the development of pseudotumour. Furthermore, we defined an optimum, ‘safe-zone’ of ±10° around the cup position of 40°/20°. Patients with acetabular components outside this safe zone have an increased risk of IP development.

Pseudotumour is a rare but important complication of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing that occurs much more commonly in women than in men. We examined the relationship between head-neck ratio (HNR) and pseudotumour formation in 18 resurfaced hips (18 patients) revised for pseudotumour and 42 asymptomatic control resurfaced hips (42 patients).

Patients in whom pseudotumour formation had occurred had higher pre-operative HNR than the control patients (mean 1.37 (sd 0.10) vs mean 1.30 (sd 0.08) p = 0.001). At operation the patients with pseudotumours had a greater reduction in the size of their femoral heads (p = 0.035) and subsequently had greater neck narrowing (mean 10.1% (sd 7.2) vs mean 3.8% (sd 3.2) p < 0.001). No female patient with a pre-operative HNR ≤ 1.3 developed a pseudotumour.

We suggest that reducing the size of the femoral head, made possible by a high pre-operative HNR, increases the risk of impingement and edge loading, and may contribute to high wear and pseudotumour formation. As the incidence of pseudotumour is low in men, it appears safe to perform resurfacing in men. However, this study suggests that it is also reasonable to resurface in women with a pre-operative HNR ≤ 1.3.

Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has gained popularity due to its perceived advantages of bone conservation and relative ease of revision to a conventional THR if it fails. Known MoMHRA-associated complications include femoral neck fracture, avascular necrosis/collapse of the femoral head/neck, aseptic loosening and soft tissue responses such as ALVAL and pseudotumours. This study’s aim was to assess the functional outcome of failed MoMHRA revised to THR and compare it with a matched cohort of primary THRs.

Method: We have revised 53 MoMHRA cases to THR; the reasons for revision were femoral neck fracture (Fracture Group, n=21), soft tissue reaction (Pseudotumour Group, n=16) and other causes (Other Group, n=16: loosening, AVN and infection). Average followup was 2.9 years. These MoMHRA revisions were compared with 103 matched controls from a primary THR cohort; matched for age, gender and length of followup. We compared, using the MannWhitney U test, operative time (OT, measured in minutes), and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) between the revised MoMHRA groups and their individual controls. We also compared, using the Kruskal Wallis test, UCLA Activity Score in the revised MoMHRA groups.

Results: There were no differences between the Fracture Group (mean OT 99.6, SD: 30.4; mean OHS 19.8, SD:9.2) and its controls (mean OT 95.9, SD: 31.8; mean OHS 17.3, SD: 7.5) nor between the Other Group (mean OT 129.4, SD: 36.7; mean OHS 22.2, SD: 9.4) and its controls (mean OT 104.4, SD: 39.2; mean OHS 20.3, SD: 10.1) in terms of OT and OHS. The Pseudotumour Group had significantly longer OT (mean 161.6, SD: 24.5, p< 0.001) and worse outcome (mean OHS 39.1, SD: 9.3, p< 0.001) than its controls (mean OT 113.1, SD: 51.7; mean OHS 20.0, SD: 9.2). In the Fracture Group, there were 3 infections requiring revisions. For the Pseudotumour Group, there were 3 recurrent dislocations, 1 femoral artery stenosis and 3 femoral nerve palsies. In the Other Group, there were 2 periprosthetic fractures. There was significant difference (p< 0.001) in UCLA scores between the MoMHRA groups. The Pseudotumour Group had the lowest mean UCLA score of 3.8 (SD: 1.89). The Fracture Group (mean: 7.0, S.D. 2.0) and the Other Group (mean: 6.7, S.D. 2.1) had similar UCLA scores.

Discussion: The results demonstrate that outcome after revision of MoMHRA is dependent upon the indication for revision. Patients revised for soft tissue reactions had significantly worse outcome. Patients with soft tissue reactions are more likely to experience complications and require further surgical intervention. The pseudotumour associated revisions were associated with a significantly prolonged OT. The overall complication rate for the study groups was quite high, with 11 (21%) revised MoMHRA cases experiencing a complication. The Pseudotumour Group had a higher complication rate (37%).

Pseudotumours are a rare complication of hip resurfacing. They are thought to be a response to metal debris which may be caused by edge loading due to poor orientation of the acetabular component. Our aim was to determine the optimal acetabular orientation to minimise the risk of pseudotumour formation.

We matched 31 hip resurfacings revised for pseudotumour formation with 58 controls who had a satisfactory outcome from this procedure. The radiographic inclination and anteversion angles of the acetabular component were measured on anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis using Einzel-Bild-Roentgen-Analyse software. The mean inclination angle (47°, 10° to 81°) and anteversion angle (14°, 4° to 34°) of the pseudotumour cases were the same (p = 0.8, p = 0.2) as the controls, 46° (29° to 60°) and 16° (4° to 30°) respectively, but the variation was greater. Assuming an accuracy of implantation of ± 10° about a target position, the optimal radiographic position was found to be approximately 45° of inclination and 20° of anteversion. The incidence of pseudotumours inside the zone was four times lower (p = 0.007) than outside the zone.

In order to minimise the risk of pseudotumour formation we recommend that surgeons implant the acetabular component at an inclination of 45° (± 10) and anteversion of 20° (± 10) on post-operative radiographs. Because of differences between the radiographic and the operative angles, this may be best achieved by aiming for an inclination of 40° and an anteversion of 25°.

Introduction: Metal on metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty (MoMHRA) has gained popularity due to its perceived advantages of bone conservation and relative ease of revision to a conventional THR if it fails. This retrospective study is aimed at assessing the functional outcome of failed MoMHRA revised to THR and comparing it with a matched cohort of primary THRs.

Method: Since 1999 we have revised 53 MoMHRA to THR. The reasons for revision were femoral neck fracture (Group A, n=21), pseudotumour (Group B, n=16) and other causes (Group C, n=16: loosening, avascular necrosis and infection). Average follow-up was 3 years months (1.2–7.3). These revisions were compared with 106 primary THRs which were age, gender and follow-up matched with the revision group in a ratio of 2:1.

Results: The mean Oxford Hip Score (OHS) was 20.1 (12–51) for group A, 39.1 (14– 56) for group B, 22.8 (12–39) for group C and 17.8 (12–45) for primary THR group. In group A, there were three infections requiring further revisions. In group B, there were three recurrent dislocations, three patients with femoral nerve palsy and one femoral artery stenosis. In group C, there were no complications. The differences in clinical and functional outcome between group B and the remaining groups as well as the difference in the outcome between group B and control group were statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: THR for failed MoMHRA was associated with significantly more complications, operation time and need for blood transfusion for the pseudotumour group. In addition, the revisions secondary to pseudotumour also had significantly worse functional outcome when compared to other MoMHRA revisions or primary THR.