A single surgeon performed 2,559 metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasties in 2,109 patients. The Corin Cormet 2000 (393 cases) and Biomet Recap implants (2,166 cases) were used in our series. In this study, the adverse wear failure (AWF) rate was 0.27%. At 10 years postoperatively, our Kaplan-Meier cumulative revision rate for AWF was 1% for all patients, 0.2% for men, 2.6% for women, and 9% for patients with a diagnosis of dysplasia. All AWF failures had component sizes ≤48 mm. All had metal ion levels above 15 ug/ml. All had acetabular inclination angles (AIA) ≥50° on standing pelvis radiographs. All had severe metallosis found at the time of revision. Six of the seven AWF cases were in women. There were no failures from pseudotumours without AWF (metallosis) in this series.
AnissianH.L.StarkA.GustafsonA.GoodV.ClarkeI.C.Metal-on-metal bearing in hip prosthesis generates 100-fold less wear debris than metal-on-polyethylene. Acta Orthop Scand.1999; 70(6) 578–82.
2.
CobbA.G.SchmalzreidT.P.The clinical significance of metal ion release from cobalt-chromium metal-on-metal hip joint arthroplasty. Proc Inst Mech Eng H.2006; 220(2): 385–98.
3.
MalviyaA.HollandJ.P.Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: 10-year Newcastle experience. Acta Orthop Belg.2009; 75(4): 477–83.
4.
BhamraM.S.CaseC.P.Biological effects of metal-on-metal hip replacements. Proc Inst Mech Eng H.2006; 220(2): 379–84.
5.
LangtonD.J.JoyceT.J.JamesonS.S.Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: the influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2011; 93(2): 164–71.
6.
WillertH.G.BuchhornG.H.FayyaziA.Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2005; 87(1): 28–36.
7.
KalbfleischJ.D.PrenticeR.L., eds. The statistical analysis of failure time data.New York: Wiley & Sons, 1980; 462.
8.
PanditH.Glyn-JonesS.McLardy-SmithP.Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2008; 90(7): 847–51.
9.
GrossT.P.LiuF.WebbL.A.Clinical outcome of the metal-on-metal hybrid Corin Cormet 2000 hip resurfacing system: an up to 11-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty.2012; 27(4): 533–8.
10.
Glyn-JonesS.PanditH.KwonY.M.DollH.GillH.S.MurrayD.W.Risk factors for inflammatory pseudotumour formation following hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2009; 91(12): 1566–74.
11.
WattersT.S.CardonaD.M.MenonK.S.VinsonE.N.BolognesiM.P.DoddL.G.Aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion: a clinicopathologic review of an under-recognized cause of prosthetic failure. Am J Clin Pathol.2010; 134(6): 886–93.
12.
Whittingham-JonesP.M.DunstanE.AltafH.CannonS.R.RevellP.A.BriggsT.W.Immune responses in patients with metal-on-metal hip articulations: a long-term follow-up. J Arthroplasty.2008; 23(8): 1212–8.
13.
FujishiroT.MoojenD.J.KobayashiN.DhertW.J.BauerT.W.Perivascular and diffuse lymphocytic inflammation are not specific for failed metal-on-metal hip implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2011; 469(4): 1127–33.
14.
HallabN.J.AndersonS.StaffordT.GlantT.JacobsJ.J.Lymphocyte responses in patients with total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res.2005; 23(2): 384–91.
15.
KwonY.M.ThomasP.SummerB.Lymphocyte proliferation responses in patients with pseudotumors following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Orthop Res.2010; 28(4): 444–50.
16.
GrossT.P.LiuF.Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with an uncemented femoral component. A seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2008; 90(Suppl 3): 32–7.
17.
MaloneyW.J.SchmalzriedT.HarrisW.H.Analysis of long-term cemented total hip arthroplasty retrievals. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2002; (405): 70–8.
18.
LangtonD.J.SprowsonA.P.MahadevaD.BhatnagarS.HollandJ.P.NargolA.V.Cup anteversion in hip resurfacing: validation of EBRA and the presentation of a simple clinical grading system. J Arthroplasty.2010; 25(4): 607–13.
19.
HartA.J.DandachliW.Schlueter-BrustK.HenckelJ.CobbJ.Large ball metal on metal hips obscure cup angle measurement on plain radiographs. Hip Int.2009; 19(4): 323–9.
20.
De HaanR.PattynC.GillH.S.MurrayD.W.CampbellP.A.De SmetK.Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2008; 90(10): 1291–7.
21.
De HaanR.CampbellP.A.SuE.P.De SmetK.A.Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: the influence of malpositioning of the components. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2008; 90(9): 1158–63.
22.
WilliamsS.LeslieI.IsaacG.JinZ.InghamE.FisherJ.Tribology and wear of metal-on-metal hip prostheses: influence of cup angle and head position. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2008; 90(Suppl 3): 111–7.
23.
LewinnekG.E.LewisJ.L.TarrR.CompereC.L.ZimmermanJ.R.Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1978; 60(2): 217–20.
24.
HartA.J.IloK.UnderwoodR.The relationship between the angle of version and rate of wear of retrieved metal-on-metal resurfacings: a prospective, CT-based study. J Bone Joint Surg Br.2011; 93(3): 315–20.
25.
BeauléPE; Canadian Hip Resurfacing Study Group. A survey on the prevalence of pseudotumors with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in Canadian academic centers. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2011; 93(Suppl 2): 118–21.
