ACE Report Cover
Resurfacing hip arthroplasty: High chromium concentrations observed at 24 months
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Language
Download Download Download
Download
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Cite
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favorites
ARTHROPLASTY
Resurfacing hip arthroplasty: High chromium concentrations observed at 24 months .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(8):3 Acta Orthop. 2011 Oct;82(5):559-66
Exclusive Author Interview

Dr. Van Susante discusses metal ion concentrations following hip resurfacing and conventional metal-on-metal arthroplasty

82 patients requiring a total hip replacement were randomized to receive a resurfacing hip arthroplasty or a conventional uncemented metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. The objective of this trial was to compare both functional outcomes and cobalt and chromium blood levels. The results indicate that patients who underwent resurfacing arthroplasty had higher chromium concentrations for up to 24 months post-surgery. Additionally, cobalt concentrations were higher in the blood for 6 months. Both groups demonstrated improvements in functional outcome measurements 24 month postoperatively.


Publication Funding Details +
Funding:
Not Reported
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Risk of Bias

5.5/10

Reporting Criteria

16/20

Fragility Index

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Yes = 1

Uncertain = 0.5

Not Relevant = 0

No = 0

The Reporting Criteria Assessment evaluates the transparency with which authors report the methodological and trial characteristics of the trial within the publication. The assessment is divided into five categories which are presented below.

3/4

Randomization

2/4

Outcome Measurements

4/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

3/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

The Fragility Index is a tool that aids in the interpretation of significant findings, providing a measure of strength for a result. The Fragility Index represents the number of consecutive events that need to be added to a dichotomous outcome to make the finding no longer significant. A small number represents a weaker finding and a large number represents a stronger finding.

Why was this study needed now?

In the treatment of advanced hip osteoarthritis, hip resurfacing arthroplasty is considered the best option. Although this procedure is hypothesized to have several advantages in comparison to conventional total hip arthroplasty; these benefits have not been confirmed by scientific evidence. Only one RCT evaluated the clinical outcomes observed with resurfacing arthroplasty compared to metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. Results from this study demonstrate improvements in functional outcomes with the resurfacing procedure; however, confounding factors may be affecting the result. In addition, there is also concern regarding toxic effects from increased metal ions (cobalt and chromium) in the blood. The previous RCT only examined functional outcomes; therefore, a trial evaluating blood levels of cobalt and chromium was merited.

What was the principal research question?

What are the effects of a resurfacing total hip arthroplasty on functional outcomes and cobalt and chromium blood levels when compared to a conventional uncemented metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty, measured over a 24 month period?

Study Characteristics +
Population:
82 patients (under 65 years) with arthritis, requiring a total hip replacement.
Intervention:
Resurfacing total hip arthroplasty (n=42).
Comparison:
Conventional uncemented metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (n=40).
Outcomes:
Outcomes included Short-Form 12 (SF-12), Oxford hip score (OHS), VAS implant satisfaction questionnaires, and the Harris hip score (HHS), as well as the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score. In addition, whole blood samples were obtained to measure cobalt and chromium concentrations.
Methods:
Randomized controlled trial
Time:
Outcomes assessed pre-operatively, and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months.
What were the important findings?
  • All functional outcome measures (HHS, OHS, UCLA, SF-12) improved following surgery and was maintained up until 24 months, in both treatment groups (p<0.001).
  • At 12 and 24 months, those in the resurfacing group had a median UCLA activity score of 8, compared to a score of 7 in the conventional group (p<0.05). Despite the randomization, patients in the resurfacing group had higher UCLA scores at baseline.
  • At 24 months, the OHS was a median 13 in resurfacing patients compared to 16 in the conventional group (p<0.05).
  • There was no statistically significant difference in patient satisfaction between the groups, at the 24 month follow up. However, patients in the resurfacing group were more satisfied than those in the conventional group, at 12 months (p=0.01, r=-0.30).
  • Cobalt concentrations were higher in the patients undergoing resurfacing arthroplasty compared to those in the conventional arthroplasty group at both 3 months (p<0.001, r=-0.50) and 6 months (p=0.006, r=-0.35).
  • Chromium concentrations were significantly higher in the resurfacing arthroplasty group, and this trend was observed for all time points up until 24 months (p<0.001, r=-0.50).
  • Two patients in the conventional arthroplasty group had an insert exchange for recurrent dislocation. One patient in the resurfacing group had a femoral component revision due to early aseptic loosening. No pseudotumors were encountered in either group.
What should I remember most?

The levels of chromium and cobalt in the blood were greater in the resurfacing group at the 6 month follow-up, The increase concentration of chromium was maintained for all follow-ups, where as the increase concentration of cobalt diminished. Patients in the resurfacing group had superior UCLA, OHS scores, and satisfaction at some follow-up periods.

How will this affect the care of my patients?

Studies with longer follow-up periods are required to more accurately determine the benefits and risks associated with the resurfacing arthroplasty compared to the conventional arthroplasty.

DISCLAIMER

This content found on this page is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. If you require medical treatment, always seek the advice of your physician or go to your nearest emergency department. The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the individuals on the content found on this page do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of OrthoEvidence.

0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
You've reached your limit of 4 free articles views this month

Access to OrthoEvidence for as little as $1.99 per week.

Stay connected with latest evidence. Cancel at any time.
  • Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
  • Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
  • Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Upgrade
Welcome Back!
Forgot Password?
Start your FREE trial today!

Your account will be affiliated with
and includes free access to OrthoEvidence


OR
Forgot Password?

OR
Please check your email

If an account exists with the provided email address, a password reset email will be sent to you. If you don't see an email, please check your spam or junk folder.

For further assistance, contact our support team.

Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Translate ACE Report

OrthoEvidence utilizes a third-party translation service to make content accessible in multiple languages. Please note that while every effort is made to ensure accuracy, translations may not always be perfect.

How to cite this ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Resurfacing hip arthroplasty: High chromium concentrations observed at 24 months. OE Journal. 2013;1(8):3. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/resurfacing-hip-arthroplasty-high-chromium-concentrations-observed-at-24-months

Copy Citation
Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Premium Member Feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into a premium OrthoEvidence account.

Share this ACE Report