Revision surgery of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties for adverse reactions to metal debris: A clinical update

Revision surgery of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties for adverse reactions to metal debris: A clinical update

Background and purpose — The initial outcomes following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (MoMHA) revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) were poor. Furthermore, robust thresholds for performing ARMD revision are lacking. This article is the second of 2. The first artic...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Gulraj S Matharu, Antti Eskelinen, Andrew Judge, Hemant G Pandit, David W Murray
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Published:	Medical Journals Sweden 2018-05-01
Series:	Acta Orthopaedica
Online Access:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1440455

Similar Items

Revision surgery of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties for adverse reactions to metal debris
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

What is appropriate surveillance for metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients?: A clinical update
by: Gulraj S Matharu, et al.
Published: (2018-01-01)

Which factors influence the rate of failure following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris?
by: Matharu, GS, et al.
Published: (2017)

Outcomes following revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris in non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients: analysis of 185 revisions from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

No threshold exists for recommending revision surgery in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients with adverse reactions to metal debris: a retrospective cohort study of 346 revisions
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2019)

Adverse reactions to metal debris occur with all types of hip replacement not just metal-on-metal hips: a retrospective observational study of 3340 revisions for adverse reactions to metal debris from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2016)

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
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

What is appropriate surveillance for metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients?: A clinical update
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

Has the threshold for revision surgery for adverse reactions to metal debris changed in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients? A cohort study using an adapted risk stratification algorithm
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2019)

What is appropriate surveillance for metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients?
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

Blood metal ion thresholds to identify patients with metal-on-metal hip implants at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris: An external multicenter validation study of Birmingham hip resurfacing and corail-pinnacle implants
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

The effectiveness of blood metal ions in identifying patients with Birmingham Hip Resurfacing and Corail-Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implants at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris: An external multi-centre validation study
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

Adverse reaction to metal debris with accompanying gout and amyloid deposits in hip arthroplasty
by: Love Shah, MD, et al.
Published: (2023-03-01)

Adverse reaction to metal debris with concomitant incidental crystalline arthropathy in hip arthroplasty
by: Edward J. Testa, BS, et al.
Published: (2017-03-01)

Prevalence of Failure due to Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris in Modern, Medium and Large Diameter Metal-on-Metal Hip Replacements--The Effect of Novel Screening Methods: Systematic Review and Metaregression Analysis.
by: Aleksi Reito, et al.
Published: (2016-01-01)

Trabecular metal versus non-trabecular metal acetabular components and the risk of re-revision following revision total hip arthroplasty: A propensity score-matched study from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

Trabecular Metal versus non-trabecular metal acetabular components and the risk of re-revision following revision total hip arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched study from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

Outcomes after metal-on-metal hip revision surgery depend on the reason for failure: a propensity score matched study
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

The effectiveness of blood metal ions in identifying patients with unilateral Birmingham hip resurfacing and Corail-Pinnacle metal-on-metal hip implants at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris.
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2016)

The Effectiveness of Blood Metal Ions in Identifying Patients with Unilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacing and Corail-Pinnacle Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants at Risk of Adverse Reactions to Metal Debris
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2016)

The cobalt-to-chromium ratio "may be" a key marker for adverse local tissue reactions in metal-on-metal hips
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2015)

Follow-up guidance for metal-on-metal hip replacement patients should be updated
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2015)

Host-specific factors affect the pathogenesis of adverse reaction to metal debris
by: Lari Lehtovirta, et al.
Published: (2019-05-01)

Follow-up of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients is currently not evidence based or cost effective
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2015)

The investigation and management of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients
by: Matharu, G
Published: (2017)

Follow-up for patients with metal-on-metal hip replacements: are the new MHRA recommendations justified?
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)

Risk factors affecting the onset of adverse reaction to metal debris after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty with a focus on serum metal ion concentrations
by: Makoto Kato, et al.
Published: (2017-11-01)

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: a review of periprosthetic biological reactions.
by: Mabilleau, G, et al.
Published: (2008)

Poor survivorship and frequent complications at a median of 10 years after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing revision
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2016)

An Atypical Adverse Local Tissue Reaction Seen With Metal-On-Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty Utilizing Polyethylene Liners With Metal Inlays
by: Hemant Reddy, MD, et al.
Published: (2023-04-01)

Adverse reaction to metal debris in a patient with acetabular shell loosening 8 years after ceramic-on-metal total hip arthroplasty
by: Benjamin R. Pulley, MD, et al.
Published: (2015-12-01)

Trabecular metal acetabular components reduce the risk of revision following primary total hip arthroplasty: A propensity score matched study from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

Metal-on-Metal Hip Arthroplasty: A Review of Adverse Reactions and Patient Management
by: James Drummond, et al.
Published: (2015-06-01)

Can blood metal ion levels be used to identify patients with bilateral Birmingham Hip Resurfacings who are at risk of adverse reactions to metal debris?
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2016)

The Inflammatory Phenotype in Failed Metal-On-Metal Hip Arthroplasty Correlates with Blood Metal Concentrations.
by: Erja-Leena Paukkeri, et al.
Published: (2016-01-01)

The future role of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing.
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2015)

Metal-on-metal hips: current status
by: Ansari, J, et al.
Published: (2017)

Patient and radiographic factors help to predict metal-on-metal hip resurfacings with evidence of a pseudotumor
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2017)

Necrotic and inflammatory changes in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasties.
by: Mahendra, G, et al.
Published: (2009)

Is the rate of revision of 36 mm metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasties with Pinnacle acetabular components related to the year of the initial operation? an interrupted time-series analysis using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
by: Matharu, G, et al.
Published: (2018)