Cargando…

Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris

Background and purpose — There is limited amount of evidence about optimal revision indications, technique, and implants when performing revision surgery for metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements due to adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD). We assessed which factors are related to re-revisions an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lainiala, Olli, Reito, Aleksi, Nieminen, Jyrki, Eskelinen, Antti
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8023960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32285741
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1748351
_version_ 1783675212027396096
author Lainiala, Olli
Reito, Aleksi
Nieminen, Jyrki
Eskelinen, Antti
author_facet Lainiala, Olli
Reito, Aleksi
Nieminen, Jyrki
Eskelinen, Antti
author_sort Lainiala, Olli
collection PubMed
description Background and purpose — There is limited amount of evidence about optimal revision indications, technique, and implants when performing revision surgery for metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements due to adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD). We assessed which factors are related to re-revisions and complications after a revision of MoM hip arthroplasty because of ARMD. We also aimed to provide information on optimal implants for these revisions. Patients and methods — 420 MoM total hip arthroplasties (THA) and 108 MoM hip resurfacings were implanted and later revised at our institution. We used Cox regression to analyze the factors associated with re-revisions and complications after a revision for ARMD. Results — A re-revision was performed on 27 THAs (6%) and 9 resurfacings (8%). The most common indication for re-revision was recurrent dislocation (20 hips, 4%). Complications not leading to re-revision were seen in 21 THAs (5%) and 6 resurfacings (6%). The most common complication was dislocation treated with closed reduction in 13 hips (2%). Use of revision head size > 36mm was associated with decreased risk for dislocations. Presence of pseudotumor, pseudotumor grade, pseudotumor size, or the choice of bearing couple were not observed to affect the risk for re-revision. Non-linear association was observed between preoperative cobalt and risk for re-revision. Interpretation — As dislocation was the most frequent post-revision complication, large head sizes should be used in revisions. Because size or type of pseudotumor were not associated with risk of re-revision, clinicians may have to reconsider, how much weight is put on the imaging findings when deciding whether or not to revise. In our data blood cobalt was associated with risk for re-revision, but this finding needs further assessment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8023960
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80239602021-04-22 Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris Lainiala, Olli Reito, Aleksi Nieminen, Jyrki Eskelinen, Antti Acta Orthop Articles Background and purpose — There is limited amount of evidence about optimal revision indications, technique, and implants when performing revision surgery for metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements due to adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD). We assessed which factors are related to re-revisions and complications after a revision of MoM hip arthroplasty because of ARMD. We also aimed to provide information on optimal implants for these revisions. Patients and methods — 420 MoM total hip arthroplasties (THA) and 108 MoM hip resurfacings were implanted and later revised at our institution. We used Cox regression to analyze the factors associated with re-revisions and complications after a revision for ARMD. Results — A re-revision was performed on 27 THAs (6%) and 9 resurfacings (8%). The most common indication for re-revision was recurrent dislocation (20 hips, 4%). Complications not leading to re-revision were seen in 21 THAs (5%) and 6 resurfacings (6%). The most common complication was dislocation treated with closed reduction in 13 hips (2%). Use of revision head size > 36mm was associated with decreased risk for dislocations. Presence of pseudotumor, pseudotumor grade, pseudotumor size, or the choice of bearing couple were not observed to affect the risk for re-revision. Non-linear association was observed between preoperative cobalt and risk for re-revision. Interpretation — As dislocation was the most frequent post-revision complication, large head sizes should be used in revisions. Because size or type of pseudotumor were not associated with risk of re-revision, clinicians may have to reconsider, how much weight is put on the imaging findings when deciding whether or not to revise. In our data blood cobalt was associated with risk for re-revision, but this finding needs further assessment. Taylor & Francis 2020-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8023960/ /pubmed/32285741 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1748351 Text en © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Articles
Lainiala, Olli
Reito, Aleksi
Nieminen, Jyrki
Eskelinen, Antti
Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title_full Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title_fullStr Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title_full_unstemmed Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title_short Complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
title_sort complications and re-revisions after revisions of 528 metal-on-metal hips because of adverse reaction to metal debris
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8023960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32285741
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1748351
work_keys_str_mv AT lainialaolli complicationsandrerevisionsafterrevisionsof528metalonmetalhipsbecauseofadversereactiontometaldebris
AT reitoaleksi complicationsandrerevisionsafterrevisionsof528metalonmetalhipsbecauseofadversereactiontometaldebris
AT nieminenjyrki complicationsandrerevisionsafterrevisionsof528metalonmetalhipsbecauseofadversereactiontometaldebris
AT eskelinenantti complicationsandrerevisionsafterrevisionsof528metalonmetalhipsbecauseofadversereactiontometaldebris