Study to Assess the Rate of Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris in Hip Resurfacing at a Minimum 13-year Follow-up

Background: Hip Resurfacing (HR), although reducing in popularity, is still used in the younger male population. Excellent medium-term results have been published; however, the use of metal on metal has reduced with increased awareness of adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). ARMD has been shown to often be clinically silent following large Head MoM total hip replacement (THR). The purpose of our study was to report the incidence of ARMD following HR with a minimum follow-up of 13 years. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of a consecutive series of patients who underwent HR between January 1, 2000 and August 1, 2005. All patients were entered into our hospital MoM hip replacement surveillance program database. Patients were reviewed yearly for symptoms and blood ion levels. Patients had Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging to assess for ARMD. Results: A total of 102 patients with 123 hip replacements were included in the study. Eight hips in 7 patients were revised: two for fracture, one for avascular necrosis, and five for ARMD. A best-case scenario of 109 (93.2%) resurfacings were surviving at 13 years. With regard to the radiological analysis, 34% were found to have ARMD on MR. Conclusion: While the implant survivorship in our series is acceptable, we found a high incidence of ARMD. Surgeons and patients with or considering a HR should be aware of the risk of ARMD developing. This allows an informed choice as to the best implant for their personal requirement and informs of the potential modes of failure and need for long-term screening. Crown Copyright (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This study reported on the incidence of adverse reactions to metal debris following Hip Resurfacing (HR) with a minimum follow-up of 13 years. The results showed a high incidence of ARMD, highlighting the importance of awareness and long-term screening for both surgeons and patients. Efforts should be made to inform individuals about potential risks and the best implant choices for their personal requirements.