Predictors of time to revision and clinical outcomes following revision of metal-on-metal hip replacements for adverse reaction to metal debris

被引:26
|
作者
Matharu, G. S. [1 ]
Pynsent, P. B. [1 ]
Sumathi, V. P. [1 ]
Mittal, S. [1 ]
Buckley, C. D. [1 ]
Dunlop, D. J. [1 ]
Revell, P. A. [1 ]
Revell, M. P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Royal Orthopaed Hosp, Birmingham B31 2AP, W Midlands, England
来源
BONE & JOINT JOURNAL | 2014年 / 96B卷 / 12期
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
OXFORD HIP; RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; INFLAMMATORY PSEUDOTUMOR; COMPONENT; FAILURE; ORIENTATION; BEARINGS; WEAR; FEATURES; NECK;
D O I
10.1302/0301-620X.96B12.33473
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
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 rerevised; 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.
引用
收藏
页码:1600 / 1609
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Serum Metal Ion Concentrations Decline (But Do Not Rapidly Normalize) Following Revision of Metal-on-Metal Total Hip Bearings
    Browne, James A.
    Wan, Zhinian
    Novicoff, Wendy M.
    Cui, Quanjun
    Brown, Thomas E.
    [J]. METAL-ON-METAL TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT DEVICES, 2013, 1560 : 51 - 60
  • [42] The Outcomes Following Revision of Monoblock Metal on Metal Acetabular Components for Painful Micromotion in the Absence of Adverse Local Tissue Reaction to Metal
    Konan, Sujith
    Garbuz, Donald S.
    Masri, Bassam A.
    Duncan, Clive P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2017, 32 (03): : 915 - 918
  • [43] Which factors influence the rate of failure following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris? AN ANALYSIS FROM THE NATIONAL JOINT REGISTRY FOR ENGLAND AND WALES
    Matharu, G. S.
    Judge, A.
    Pandit, H. G.
    Murray, D. W.
    [J]. BONE & JOINT JOURNAL, 2017, 99B (08): : 1020 - 1027
  • [44] Metal ion levels and revision rates in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a comparative study
    Robinson, Patrick G.
    Wilkinson, Andrew J.
    Meek, Robert M. D.
    [J]. HIP INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 24 (02) : 123 - 128
  • [45] One-Component Revision of Failed Hip Resurfacing from Adverse Reaction to Metal Wear Debris
    Pritchett, James W.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2014, 29 (01): : 219 - 224
  • [46] A simulator study of adverse wear with metal and cement debris contamination in metal-on-metal hip bearings
    Halim, T.
    Clarke, I. C.
    Burgett-Moreno, M. D.
    Donaldson, T. K.
    Savisaar, C.
    Bowsher, J. G.
    [J]. BONE & JOINT RESEARCH, 2015, 4 (03): : 29 - 37
  • [47] Patient-Reported Outcomes After Revision of Metal-on-Metal Total Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty
    Mata-Fink, Ana
    Philipson, Daniel J.
    Keeney, Benjamin J.
    Ramkumar, Dipak B.
    Moschetti, Wayne E.
    Tomek, Ivan M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2017, 32 (04): : 1241 - 1244
  • [48] Metal-on-metal hip replacements: implications for general practice
    Matharu, Victoria K.
    Matharu, Gulraj S.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2017, 67 (665): : 544 - 545
  • [49] Failure rates of stemmed metal-on-metal hip replacements
    Verheyen, Cees C. P. M.
    Verhaar, Jan A. N.
    [J]. LANCET, 2012, 380 (9837): : 105 - 105
  • [50] FDA warns about metal-on-metal hip replacements
    Tanne, Janice Hopkins
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 346