To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Higher incidence of pseudotumour formation and elevated cobalt levels with MoM vs MoP THA

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
February 2016

Higher incidence of pseudotumour formation and elevated cobalt levels with MoM vs MoP THA

Vol: 5| Issue: 2| Number:68| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Pseudotumour incidence, cobalt levels and clinical outcome after large head metal-on-metal and conventional metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty: mid-term results of a randomised controlled trial

Bone Joint J. 2015 Nov;97-B(11):1481-7

Contributing Authors:
HC van der Veen IH Reininga WP Zijlstra MF Boomsma SK Bulstra JJ van Raay

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

104 patients from a previous randomized controlled trial comparing metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) and metal-on-metal (MoM) bearings in total hip arthroplasty were considered for a posthoc review, of which 98 were available or eligible. A total of 93 of these patients were included. The purpose of the study was to compare the incidence of pseudotumour development between groups of this study populatio...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue