Any surface hippies experiencing problems with these implants? MODELS > Durom and A.S.R.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/23/business/complaints-soar-on-hip-implants-as-dangers-are-studied.html?hp

Here is the comment I just posted on NY Times website.

Three weeks ago I received a metal-on-metal implant.  Why would I do such a foolish thing?

I am a very active 50 year old who has lived with arthritis pain for over 10 years.  Each year despite trying practically every method to manage the pain it became debilitating.  My first surgeon recommended that I wait for 10 years then get a total hip replacement.  But I couldn't stand choking down enough ibuprofen for that long and cause other damage.

So I researched the internet and found out about hip resurfacing.  I read about the successes of athletes returning to high level competition.  I read about the problems that have occurred with these devices.  I read scientific and medical research papers.  I read the great statistics kept by the UK and Australian health services.

The studies concluded that with an experienced surgeon and a proven implant that there is a very high (98%) success rate at 10 years.  So I found a surgeon that was very experienced (over 2600 hip resurfacings) and an implant with the best track record, Birmingham Hip Resurfacing by Smith and Nephew.  Furthermore if my device wears out I still have a femur that will accept a total hip replacement.  I have no reservations.

Yes, there are problems with some metal-on-metal implants.  In some cases it is the design of the device and in others it is the poor placement of the device.  In either case there are not "metal shavings" created but rather metal ions released by improper wear.  This is not dissimilar from the plastic particles created by total hip replacement implants.  There does need to be greater oversight by the FDA but the patient can do their own research as well.

There are great links at www.surfacehippy.info and www.hipresurfacingsite.com Including research and studies.

This was discussed in another thread, but if you read the last comment on the article itself, it pretty much mirrors my opinion: it is incomplete and biased. If you look at the "nonexistent" registries in Australia and England, the results are good for MOM HR devices except for the ASR.  Just my opinion, but this writer didn't do her research well.

Hernanu-

Discussed in another thread?  This article was just published this morning.

Are you referring to the article in the NY Times that was published about two months ago?  That was even a worse article in terms of broad sweeping generalizations and research with an agenda.

These articles make me so angry.

Dan

I like the way these types of articles make broad statements like:

"most surgeons are abandoning the all-metal hips"

without any real information to back them up.

As far as I know, "most" surgeons who regularly perform MOM resurfacings are still doing them.

"Most" surgeons were never doing them in the first place.

Yeah, I thought it was the earlier article until I took a closer look. Bad reporting to chase a sensationalistic story without taking a closer look at the facts.

There you have it. Journalism is dead. I also smell a rat that may be the Medical-Industrial Complex promoting the easier, cheaper devices.

The issue was discussed on NPR Dianne Rehm show this morning, you may be able to catch it in the DR show archives. Brand names were not mentioned which I found interesting.

I wrote the Director of Consumer Communications at Smith & Nephew regarding this. Here's his reply:

"Matt â€" Thanks for your email. Glad to hear you’ve had such a positive result with your BHR Hip.  Yes, we know this reporter well. He writes tough stories about the implants that fail, but rarely about the implants that work well. We’ve corresponded to him multiple times over the years, but it doesn’t get us very far.  Instead, we try to reach potential patients via advertising and online communications.

Thanks for your support of our technology. And best of luck as you work through the post-op return to your pain-free life."

I've also written the Times, and I think that a few more letters from us, especially those who have had the well-working devices for a few years, may be helpful. letters@nytimes.com

hi it has taken me a while to read through all the above threads relating to hi blood metal readings and hip revision, thanks every one as I had a decision to make as 3 years a go I fractured my hip underneath my 8yr old resufaced hip every thing but the metal cup was replaced, all ok apart from sudden leg pain which was eventualy diagnosed as chronic sciatica. I was called back 18months  ago and had a blood test which was hi with metals but as I was still able to walk for an hour and was doing about 6hrs cycling a week it was decided I would be seen 6monthly. My surgeon looked relieved recently as there was some bone thining around the cup and he wanted me in to redo the whole thing. I would have preffered he just replaced the cup as I am 56 and may need another replacement in the future, he was happy to wait till march at my convience (nhs) My blood was only taken once, my desision now after taking in all this info is to  get my bloods repeated and have a long chat with my GP RE his expience of my consultant and post op patiernts with similiar problems. thank you

Hi all,
I keep reading about the BHR verses THR and will put my twopenny worth in.

There can be problems with BHR, I have just had a total revision from a BHR BUT, it was surgeon error, serious errors actually.

If I had the choice I would go BHR again on the other hip but my present surgeon says I am not a good candidate for it.

I guess what I am saying is the BHR technology is fantastic and people should not be put off by the very small number that have to be revised usually because of surgeon error.

I hope this helps other people awaiting surgery.
Take care all