We report the clinical and radiological outcome at ten years of 104 primary total hip replacements (100 patients) using the Metasul metal-on-metal bearing. Of these, 52 had a cemented Stuehmer-Weber polyethylene acetabular component with a Metasul bearing and 52 had an uncemented Allofit acetabular component with a Metasul liner. A total of 15 patients (16 hips) died before their follow-up at ten years and three were lost to follow-up. The study group therefore comprised 82 patients (85 hips). The mean Oxford score at ten years was 20.7 (12 to 42). Six of 85 hips required revision surgery. One was performed because of infection, one for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component and four because of unexplained pain. Histological examination showed an aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis associated lesion-type tissue response in two of these. Continued follow-up is advocated in order to monitor the long-term performance of the Metasul bearing and tissue responses to metal debris

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate blood metal ion levels, leucocyte profiles, and serum cytokines in patients with a total hip arthroplasty (THA) involving modular dual-mobility components.

We carried out metal artefact-reduction MRI, three-dimensional CT measurement of the position of the component and inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry analysis of cobalt and chromium levels in whole blood on 26 patients with unexplained pain following metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty.

MRI showed periprosthetic lesions around 16 hips, with 14 collections of fluid and two soft-tissue masses. The lesions were seen in both men and women and in symptomatic and asymptomatic hips. Using three-dimensional CT, the median inclination of the acetabular component was found to be 55° and its positioning was outside the Lewinnek safe zone in 13 of 16 cases. Using inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry, the levels of blood metal ions tended to be higher in painful compared with well-functioning metal-on-metal hips.

These three clinically useful investigations can help to determine the cause of failure of the implant, predict the need for future revision and aid the choice of revision prostheses.

We report 17 patients (20 hips) in whom metal-on-metal resurfacing had been performed and who presented with various symptoms and a soft-tissue mass which we termed a pseudotumour. Each patient underwent plain radiography and in some, CT, MRI and ultrasonography were also performed. In addition, histological examination of available samples was undertaken.

All the patients were women and their presentation was variable. The most common symptom was discomfort in the region of the hip. Other symptoms included spontaneous dislocation, nerve palsy, a noticeable mass or a rash. The common histological features were extensive necrosis and lymphocytic infiltration. To date, 13 of the 20 hips have required revision to a conventional hip replacement. Two are awaiting revision.

We estimate that approximately 1% of patients who have a metal-on-metal resurfacing develop a pseudotumour within five years. The cause is unknown and is probably multifactorial. There may be a toxic reaction to an excess of particulate metal wear debris or a hypersensitivity reaction to a normal amount of metal debris. We are concerned that with time the incidence of these pseudotumours may increase. Further investigation is required to define their cause.

Total hip replacement (THR) is a very common procedure undertaken in up to 285 000 Americans each year. Patient satisfaction with THR is very high, with improvements in general health, quality of life, and function while at the same time very cost effective. Although the majority of patients have a high degree of satisfaction with their THR, 27% experience some discomfort, and up to 6% experience severe chronic pain. Although it can be difficult to diagnose the cause of the pain in these patients, this clinical issue should be approached systematically and thoroughly. A detailed history and clinical examination can often provide the correct diagnosis and guide the appropriate selection of investigations, which will then serve to confirm the clinical diagnosis made.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:70–3.

We undertook a retrospective cohort study to determine clinical outcomes following the revision of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements for adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD), and to identify predictors of time to revision and outcomes following revision. Between 1998 and 2012 a total of 64 MoM hips (mean age at revision of 57.8 years; 46 (72%) female; 46 (72%) hip resurfacings and 18 (28%) total hip replacements) were revised for ARMD at one specialist centre. At a mean follow-up of 4.5 years (1.0 to 14.6) from revision for ARMD there were 13 hips (20.3%) with post-operative complications and eight (12.5%) requiring re-revision.

The Kaplan–Meier five-year survival rate for ARMD revision was 87.9% (95% confidence interval 78.9 to 98.0; 19 hips at risk). Excluding re-revisions, the median absolute Oxford hip score (OHS) following ARMD revision using the percentage method (0% best outcome and 100% worst outcome) was 18.8% (interquartile range (IQR) 7.8% to 48.3%), which is equivalent to 39/48 (IQR 24.8/48 to 44.3/48) when using the modified OHS. Histopathological response did not affect time to revision for ARMD (p = 0.334) or the subsequent risk of re-revision (p = 0.879). Similarly, the presence or absence of a contralateral MoM hip bearing did not affect time to revision for ARMD (p = 0.066) or the subsequent risk of re-revision (p = 0.178).

Patients revised to MoM bearings had higher rates of re-revision (five of 16 MoM hips re-revised; p = 0.046), but those not requiring re-revision had good functional results (median absolute OHS 14.6% or 41.0/48). Short-term morbidity following revision for ARMD was comparable with previous reports. Caution should be exercised when choosing bearing surfaces for ARMD revisions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1600–9.

Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing has been widely performed in the United Kingdom for over a decade. However, the literature reports conflicting views of the benefits: excellent medium- to long-term results with some brands in specific subgroups, but high failure rates and local soft-tissue reactions in others. The National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) has collected data on all hip resurfacings performed since 2003. This retrospective cohort study recorded survival time to revision from a resurfacing procedure, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis who underwent resurfacing between 2003 and 2010 were included in the analyses. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which the risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates.

A total of 27 971 hip resurfacings were performed during the study period, of which 1003 (3.59%) underwent revision surgery. In the final adjusted model, we found that women were at greater risk of revision than men (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.30, p = 0.007), but the risk of revision was independent of age. Of the implant-specific predictors, five brands had a significantly greater risk of revision than the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) (ASR: HR = 2.82, p < 0.001, Conserve: HR = 2.03, p < 0.001, Cormet: HR = 1.43, p = 0.001, Durom: HR = 1.67, p < 0.001, Recap: HR = 1.58, p = 0.007). Smaller femoral head components were also significantly more likely to require revision (≤ 44 mm: HR = 2.14, p < 0.001, 45 to 47 mm: HR = 1.48, p = 0.001) than medium or large heads, as were operations performed by low-volume surgeons (HR = 1.36, p <  0.001). Once these influences had been removed, in 4873 male patients < 60 years old undergoing resurfacing with a BHR, the five-year estimated risk of revision was 1.59%.

In summary, after adjustment for a range of covariates we found that there were significant differences in the rate of failure between brands and component sizes. Younger male patients had good five-year implant survival when the BHR was used.

We report the outcome of total hip replacement in 29 failed metal-on-metal resurfacing hip replacements in which the primary surgery was performed between August 1995 and February 2005. The mean length of follow-up was five years (1.7 to 11.7). Of the 29 hip resurfacings, 19 acetabular components and all the femoral components were revised (28 uncemented stems and one cemented stem). There were no deaths and none of the patients was lost to follow-up. None of the hips underwent any further revision. The results of the revision resurfacing group were compared with those of a control group of age-matched patients. In the latter group there were 236 primary total hip replacements and 523 resurfacings performed during the same period by the same surgeons.

The outcome of the revision resurfacing group was comparable with that of the stemmed primary hip replacement group but was less good than that of the primary hip resurfacing group. Long-term follow-up is advocated to monitor the outcome of these cases.

Lately, concerns have arisen following the use of large metal-on-metal bearings in hip replacements owing to reports of catastrophic soft-tissue reactions resulting in implant failure and associated complications. This review examines the literature and contemporary presentations on current clinical dilemmas in metal-on-metal hip replacement.

We sought to establish the incidence of joint failure secondary to adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in a large, three surgeon, multicentre study involving 4226 hips with a follow-up of 10 to 142 months. Three implants were studied: the Articular Surface Replacement; the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing; and the Conserve Plus. Retrieved implants underwent analysis using a co-ordinate measuring machine to determine volumetric wear. There were 58 failures associated with ARMD. The median chromium and cobalt concentrations in the failed group were significantly higher than in the control group (p < 0.001). Survival analysis showed a failure rate in the patients with Articular Surface Replacement of 9.8% at five years, compared with < 1% at five years for the Conserve Plus and 1.5% at ten years for the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing. Two ARMD patients had relatively low wear of the retrieved components. Increased wear from the metal-on-metal bearing surface was associated with an increased rate of failure secondary to ARMD. However, the extent of tissue destruction at revision surgery did not appear to be dose-related to the volumetric wear.