Advertisement

Metal on Metal in Resurfacing Arthroplasty: Risks or Benefits?

  • M. Menge
Conference paper
Part of the Ceramics in Orthopaedics book series (CIO)

Abstract

At the beginning of hip endoprosthetics was the substitution of destroyed cartilage by biologigal or artificial materials. However, successful results were only achieved after the introduction of abrasion-resistant materials in combination with exactly matching differences of diameter (radial clearance) of head and socket. The cobalt-based alloy Vitalliun® which had been introduced into medical therapy by dentists in 1932 was used by Smith-Petersen [1,2] to create the world’s first hemiprosthesis (1937) available on the market. The first total hip replacement was implanted by Wiles in London, who used a metal on metal joint made of stainless steel. In the course of the development of arthroplasty and after the introduction of bone cement, the successful period of THR began. Despite the excellent long-term results achieved for metal on metal prostheses (McKee-Farrar [10], Ring) which have been implanted since the sixties, hard on soft material configurations as specified by Charnley for his Low Friction Arthroplasty have been used at an increasing extent since the mid-seventies. The reasons for this were the excellent initial results obtained from the use of such prostheses. Apart from that, abrasion and loosening of acetabular cups due to equatorial jamming had occurred in some metal on metal prostheses in which the radial clearance provided for had been inappropriate. Moreover, there had been doubts in respect of possible allergic reactions and the possibility of carcinogenic effects of the metal particles at that time already [1]. The triumphant clinical advance of THRs using metal femoral heads and plastic acetabular cups continued until the problem of polyethylene abrasion and the destruction of bone induced by particle debris occurred and required new approaches to be developed [5]. This “particle disease” stopped, either, new attempts of resurfacing arthroplasty using a metal cap which was placed on the preserved bone of the femoral head, and a thin polyethylene cup, which had been rediscovered by Wagner and other authors.

Keywords

Femoral Head Radial Clearance Metal Bearing Abrasion Rate Metal Prosthesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Amstutz, HC, P Grigoris (1996) Metal on Metal Bearings in Hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 329S, S11–S34Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anonym (o.J.) The Century in Orthopedics. www.slackinc.com/bone/ortoday/200001/time.pdf
  3. 3.
    Band T (2003) Microstructure and Metallurgy for Metal on Metal Bearings. The International Resurfacing Forum, June 13th-15th, MalagaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Centerpulse (o.J) MetasuIR Metal Ion Studies, www.centerpulse.com
  5. 5.
    Elke R (2001 ) Partikelkrankheit. Orthopäde 30, 258–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals (2002) Review of Cobalt/Chromium www.foodstandards.gov.uk
  7. 7.
    International Agency for Research on Cancer (1999) IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans: Surgical Implants and other Foreign Bodies (Vol. 74) http://monographs.iarc.fr/htdocs/monographs/vol74/implants.html
  8. 8.
    Jacobs JJ, AK Doom, et al. (l 996) Cobalt and Chromium Concentrations in Patients with Metal-on-Metal total Hip Replacements. 5th World Biomaterial Congress, June 2, 1996, Toronto, 918Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lhotka C, Steffan et al. (2000) Determination of Cobalt and Chromium Blood Concentrations in Patients with different Metal-Metal Pairings. AAOS Meeting Orlando, March 17, 2000Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacobsson SA, D Krister, O Wahlström (1996) 20-Year Results of McKee-Farrar Versus Charnley Prosthesis. Cin Orthop 329S, S60–S68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maltoni C, F Minardi,, JF Holland (o.J.) Physical Carcinogens, www.cancer.org
  12. 12.
    McMinn DJW (2003) Die Entwicklung des Metall/Metall-Hüftoberflächenersatzes. Hip International 13(Suppl. 2)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Institute for Clinical Excellence (2002) Guidance on the use of metal on metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Technology Appraisal Guidance No 44. www.nice.org.uk
  14. 14.
    SulzerMedica (1999) Research and Analysis News: Total Joint Replacement and Cancer. FirmenmitteilungGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ungethüm, M, W Winkler-Gnieweck (1984) Metallische Werkstoffe in der Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie. Thieme, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Varano R, JD Bobyn, S Yue (2003) Does Alloy Heat Treatment Influence Metal-on-Metal Wear? Orthop Res Soc Poster #1399 49th Annual MeetingGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Visuri T, et al. (1996) Cancer Risk After Metal on Metal and Polyethylene on Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 329S, S280–9Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weber, BG (1992) Metall-Metall-Totalprothese des Hüftgelenkes: Zurück in die Zukunft. Z Orthop 130, 306–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Menge

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations