GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Online Resource  (1)
  • British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery  (1)
  • Buckley, C. D.  (1)
Material
  • Online Resource  (1)
Publisher
  • British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery  (1)
Person/Organisation
Language
Years
  • 1
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery ; 2014
    In:  The Bone & Joint Journal Vol. 96-B, No. 12 ( 2014-12), p. 1600-1609
    In: The Bone & Joint Journal, British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery, Vol. 96-B, No. 12 ( 2014-12), p. 1600-1609
    Abstract: 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 re-revised; 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. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1600–9.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2049-4394 , 2049-4408
    Language: English
    Publisher: British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2697480-0
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...