New York Times Post on Hip Resurfacing re Metal Ions

[Skid]

I just read an acticle in the New York Times basiscally talks about hip resurfacing turning into the country's biggest medical device failure. The evidence of these failure all point to the medical debris associated with metal on metal HR.

I receivrd my HR in 2006 by Dr. Frank Smith in Hamilton. I was very impressed by this surgeon & he convinced me that I would never have a problem for the rest of my life. I am turning 55 this year. This confidence has been very reassuring & life has been great until reading this artical.

Anyways these metal ions have really brought me down especially not knowing if these ions are slowing distroying tissue in my body not to mention risk of kidney cancer. I can not say I remember the risks being described to me in this fashion when I was deciding which proceedure to go with.

If anyone can cheer me up & bring back my old "right decission" confidence backI would be gratefull.

Skid

[Dannywayoflife]

Welcome skid! 
The nyt are pretty good at printing not even half the story when it comes to hip resurfacing. If the devices are placed as they were designed there really is very very little chance of there being any issue for you. If you want to hear the real truth watch the Derrick mcminn interviews on YouTube.
Danny

[obxpelican]

Skid,

Have you ever been tested for metal ions?  If you test negative then you are not going to suffer at all from the issue.  If your implant is not at a nominal angle you might have the issue, most times it's mis-aligned implants that cause the isssues.

All patients should from time to time (talk to your doctor) get a hip x-ray and a metal ion test.  I'm going to get mine done this week but I would not wait for symptoms, this will also calm any fears you might have.

In the end IMHO I think 90+ % of us won't ever have any metal ion issues.

Hope it all works out for you skid.

BTW--- I think the NY Times is the best newspaper for the bedding for my wife's pet rat, but other than that I see no need to have that paper around.


Chuck

I just read an acticle in the New York Times basiscally talks about hip resurfacing turning into the country's biggest medical device failure. The evidence of these failure all point to the medical debris associated with metal on metal HR.

I receivrd my HR in 2006 by Dr. Frank Smith in Hamilton. I was very impressed by this surgeon & he convinced me that I would never have a problem for the rest of my life. I am turning 55 this year. This confidence has been very reassuring & life has been great until reading this artical.

Anyways these metal ions have really brought me down especially not knowing if these ions are slowing distroying tissue in my body not to mention risk of kidney cancer. I can not say I remember the risks being described to me in this fashion when I was deciding which proceedure to go with.

If anyone can cheer me up & bring back my old "right decission" confidence backI would be gratefull.

Skid

[Two4One]

 Hi Skid,

I'm brand new bilateral.  I choose to read, talk, and meet in person all these successful, happy people running around living their life pain free, just like you.

If your sensible, that bionic of yours will keep on keeping on.

Good luck!

[Pat Walter]

I often reply to new people that find these articles and are frightened by them.  They are half truths. Here is my reply from previous discussions about the NY Times articles:

There have been a lot of articles in the NY times.  Most are very biased and contain partial truths.  If you would like to hear responses to these negative articles please listen to the following:
 
 
http://www.surfacehippy.info/doctorinterviews/mcminninterview.php
McMinn responds
 
All of my current doctor interviews include their thoughts about the negative press from NY times and other media
 
http://www.surfacehippy.info/shvideos/videosdoctor.php
 
The group has talked about these articles before.  You can search to find some of the conversations.   The patients, however,  really don’t have the experience or education to address the negative, incorrect press as the surgeons above do.  I think you will find the above videos very informative. We as patients all have opinons, but it is best to rely on doctor information and national registry information.

http://www.surfacehippy.info/nationalregistries.php
 
Pat

[obxpelican]

Now where is the like button?



Chuck

[Skid]

Hey folks thanks for the input...did not think people would reply as quickly.

I really did not want to "freak anybody out" but you have to be proactive "if" when you have "alien" device...sorry for the expression...in your body.

As far as I am concerned, if there is medical propaganda out there that has anything to do with what has been installed in my body , I want to know about it.

The whole thing is about communication & if you here something pro/con about metal on metal we should be talking to each other...we are united in a twisted sense.

[Jeremy76761]

Hey Skid, thanks for the info about Frank Smith in Hamilton. I saw Schemitz in Toronto for my dx who also does HRs, although probably will see Bose in India for HR someday.

NYT articles are useful sources because they point to other more primary sources sometimes. And what they do not say underscores the weakness in the reporting. I would agree McMinn's case is more pursuasive.

Note by Patricia Walter:  The info below is this person opinion and not based on any medical studies, national directories or anything I have learned at the many hip resurfacing courses and conferences I have attended. There is no special soft tissue damage during hip resurfacing.  The surgeons are very careful to keep as much of the neck capsule as possible.  If you don't understand, you can watch the surgery videos and listen to the surgeons explain their technique.  I recently watched a live BHR surgery and Dr. Kusuma was very careful to conserve all possible tissue.  The info below is not based on anything I have ever read or learned.


Personal opinon by poster: However a consideration address enough by McMinn et al. is the problem of extra soft tissue damage with HRs. Bone is conserved, soft tissue is not. And let's face it, soft tissue damage matters.

[obxpelican]

Jeremy,

What soft tissue damage are you refering to?  Most doctors now preserve the capsule now.  Most everything else is stitched back the way it was in the first place.  HRs do not cause more soft tissue damage.

Soft tissue damage can occur if the metal ion shedding is severe but in the great majority of cases metal ions are not at issue.

And what good are the articles in the NY times if they are skewing everything and ignoring the statistics?  What primary sources?  The issue with the ASR?

Chuck

[hernanu]

Hi Skid, one of the things I value on this site is that we do discuss the negative and positive. The series of NY Times articles on this issue have had several threads to discuss them, with a lot of input from many of the folks here.

Metal ion issues are very real to me, there are definitely folks who do have problems and have had revisions, damage and heightened levels. You'll find several people here who have had those issues, and can follow their discussions.

Like you, I think it's important not just to note these issues as it may affect us, but much more to provide support for those of us whose implant fails due to metallosis and face a revision. It is also important for all of us to define well what causes the problem and how it can be minimized. I personally agree with Mr. McMinn, but can respect alternative opinions.

[obxpelican]

Skid,

The metal ions issue has been talked to death on here.  Nobody has any issues with discussions, but when it gets to a point where we may be scaring people out of a life changing surgery then at least on this forum it will be dealt with.

Yes, there is an issue with the ASR and the shedding of metal ions, but that does not mean that the BHR has issues.  When Viox was killing people nobody said we had to get rid of tylenol. 

What everyone has to remember is that many new hippies look on this forum for help, by disseminating false information we may hurt those who are in pain that could be helped with an HR. 

You will notice that Pat has whole sections dedicated to problems and revisions, nobody has an issue with problems, but those problems are VERY rare when patients pick the most experienced surgeons.

As with any forum it's good to lurk, search first before you post something, often you will find the answers to your questions or you might even save yourself an embarassing moment.

Chuck

Hey folks thanks for the input...did not think people would reply as quickly.

I really did not want to "freak anybody out" but you have to be proactive "if" when you have "alien" device...sorry for the expression...in your body.

As far as I am concerned, if there is medical propaganda out there that has anything to do with what has been installed in my body , I want to know about it.

The whole thing is about communication & if you here something pro/con about metal on metal we should be talking to each other...we are united in a twisted sense.

[Dannywayoflife]

Well said chuck I think alot of people forget the retention rates of the bhr as shown in several national registries.

[curt]

    I'll just go back to the basic question for Skid..."If anyone can cheer me up & bring back my old "right decission" confidence backI would be gratefull."   Every time I read an article about metalosis or revisions in general, I silently hope that I will never need to worry about it.  I had a great surgeon and it appears, a great outcome. 
    Someone once said that your level of desperation will drive your tactics.  I was desperate, and would not have hesitated to have a THR if that was my only option.  Doing nothing was simply unacceptable.  The chance to have an HR and be able to get some decent activity back was a bonus, and I was calmed by the fact that a THR was an acceptable fall-back if things went sour.
     So Skid, simply ask yourself if you are better now than before your surgery, and if that result is worth the risks.  For me it was a no-brainer so I can concentrate on the positives and enjoy my statistically promising future.  Informed but unafraid!

Curt

[Pat Walter]

I am locking this topic.

As Chuck said, this discussion group is to help people learn about the positive aspects of hip resurfacing.  I do address the fact that there are a few problems, but they are in the MINORITY.  The BHR has a retention rate of 96% which is excellent.  Again, this is not opinion, but fact based on national registries and medical studies.

Anyone can go searching and find some negative videos and articles about how bad hip resurfacing is. There is a lot of negative information out there which is not fact based.  This website and forum is to not scare people to death about having a hip resurfacing, but to give them support and positive information about a very successful type of hip replacement called a hip resurfacing.

Again, if you don't like hip resurfacing - that is fine.  Don't have one.  If you have a hip resurfacing that did not work well, I am VERY SORRY for your experience, but there is no surgery or process in this world that is always perfect.  What I know and almost 3000 folks here know is that we had hip resurfacing surgeries and for 96% of us - it works GREAT.

If some people here have an agenda to make hip resurfacing look bad and scare people away from it by digging up obscure information, videos and interviews from surgeons that have not had good experience with hip resurfacing or just don't do hip resurfacing - it is not really welcomed.  I have plenty of information about people with problems and their stories.

I also have a great deal of information from doctor interviews, national registries and medical studies that show hip resurfacing is an excellent option. That is what this website is about.  There is no reason I have to change the goal of this website to show nothing but bad information about hip resurfacing.  That will never be my goal.  I pay for this website and have invested over 6 years of time to keep it growing.  My goal is to show how great hip resurfacing is.  If you personally don't agree, then please go start your own website about the negative aspects of hip resurfacing.  They are in the minority and that is the way the information on this website will remain.  Positive information will be 96% of the information.  I will not let people keep digging up obscure information and throwing it in front of new peoples faces using this website. If your agenda is to kill hip resurfacing and show how bad it is - then go elsewhere, you are not welcomed here. This is a place to learn and help each other, not bash hip resurfacing.

Pat