The interpretation of metal ion concentrations and their role in clinical management of patients with metal-on-metal implants is still controversial.
We questioned whether patients undergoing hip resurfacing with no clinical problems could be differentiated from those with clinical (pain, loss of function) and/or radiographic (component malpositioning, migration, bone loss), problems based on metal ion levels, and if there was a threshold metal level that predicted the need for clinical intervention. Furthermore, we asked if patient and implant factors differed between these functional groups.
Metal levels higher than these proposed safe upper limits can predict problems with metal-on-metal resurfacings and are important parameters in the management of at-risk patients.
Level of evidence: Level II, diagnostic study. Copyright remains with the authors and publisher.
The interpretation of metal ion concentrations and their role in clinical management of patients with metal-on-metal implants is still controversial.
We questioned whether patients undergoing hip resurfacing with no clinical problems could be differentiated from those with clinical (pain, loss of function) and/or radiographic (component malpositioning, migration, bone loss), problems based on metal ion levels, and if there was a threshold metal level that predicted the need for clinical intervention. Furthermore, we asked if patient and implant factors differed between these functional groups.
Metal levels higher than these proposed safe upper limits can predict problems with metal-on-metal resurfacings and are important parameters in the management of at-risk patients.
Level of evidence: Level II, diagnostic study. Copyright remains with the authors and publisher.