Poor functional outcomes seen after revising metal-on-metal hip resurfacings

  • June 2, 2011

Discuss in OrthoMind
Discuss in OrthoMind

COPENHAGEN — A hip tribology study presented here showed that in a series of 795 patients who underwent primary metal-on-metal hip replacements between 1997 and 2009, those revised to a second or a third hip arthroplasty had what investigators described as “disappointing” post-revision functional outcomes.

According to James Beazley, MBChB, MRCS, a trauma and orthopaedic registrar in the West Midlands, U.K., “this is one of the largest series” of its kind, as it included 927 procedures with extended follow-up.

Beazley, who presented the findings at the 12th EFORT Congress 2011, said women comprised two-thirds of the 68 patients studied who required a revision procedure by 6 years postoperatively, on average.

James Beazley, MBChB, MRCS
James Beazley

However, the overall average time to revision was 49 months following the index resurfacing procedure. A loose cup, reported in 31% of patients, was the main reason for the second surgeries.

Thirteen percent of patients had a second revision, typically for infection or instability, Beazley said, noting that group had an Oxford Hip Score of 34 points.

Reference:
  • Beazley J, Foguet P, Prakash U, et al. Functional outcome of revised metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Region: An analysis of epidemiology and risk factors over 11 years. Paper #1088. Presented at the 12th EFORT Congress 2011. June 1-4. Copenhagen.

Twitter Follow OrthoSuperSite.com on Twitter

Comments

Healio is intended for health care provider use and all comments will be posted at the discretion of the editors. We reserve the right not to post any comments with unsolicited information about medical devices or other products. At no time will Healio be used for medical advice to patients.