Ions Measured And Normal

[Lopsided]

Did my yearly health check two weeks ago, and while I was at it, I asked them to measure my chromium and cobalt ions, and just got the results. Eight months from surgery my levels are Co 1.17ug/l, Cr 0.66ug/l (whole blood). These results are good, and I will test again next year, when the device should have reached 'steady state', and see if the levels are lower.

In the recent video of Dr. Brooks, he says the Birmingham is harder because it is not heat treated. Well I got the C+ which is heat treated, and it looks as though it is working for me.

[Neild5]

I understand the advantages of using as-cast metal on metal components, after polishing the carbides are the active bearing points.  By heat treating the casting some of these carbides are lost leaving the softer metals to be the bearing surface.

[Lopsided]

I understand the advantages of using as-cast metal on metal components, after polishing the carbides are the active bearing points.  By heat treating the casting some of these carbides are lost leaving the softer metals to be the bearing surface.

No, I don't go for that at all. CoCr alloys are known as 'stellar' or super alloys because of their properties. The heat treatment improves the smoothness of the finish, so there could be less wear.

Birmingham advocates should understand that there are other devices which can be equally as good. And seeing as no one knows the long term results, possibly better.

There are three FDA approved devices. One of them is the C+. The C+ is not as cast, and now the ASR is off the market, is the device currently with the least clearance and lowest coverage. Dr. Brooks talked in favour of the Birmingham, but it seems the same arguments could have been used for any device.

[Dannywayoflife]

Lopsided, what would be considered normal levels for someone with no inplant?

[Lopsided]

Lopsided, what would be considered normal levels for someone with no inplant?

Apparently, about 0.5 ug/l or somewhere thereabouts for both Co and Cr. There does not seem to be any real standard about what are toxic levels, some sources say 7, some 20. There are also two different ways of measuring, using the whole blood or serum. The whole metal ion level business is not too well documented or accessable.

What is sure is that after you get an implant, your levels go up a bit. The first year the device is wearing in and your ion levels are higher, and then by the first year, you reach 'steady state', and the levels go down a bit. So I will test next year and see if I have gone down.

You have not had your operation yet, so you could get your levels tested now, and then a few months after, and then a year after that, and get a good idea of how your levels go up a bit, and then halfway back down again (especially if you can get tested on the NHS).

[Dannywayoflife]

That sounds a great idea! I'll try and get my doctor to do it on Wednesday!

[Lopsided]

Make sure you ask for the 'whole blood' test, rather than serum. It seems to be the usual test.

And post your results too.

In fact, this could be a new poll: levels before op, wear in levels, and steady state levels.

[Dannywayoflife]

That sounds like a plan! I will try and get my dr to do it and I'll keep you posted!

[einreb]

In the recent video of Dr. Brooks, he says the Birmingham is harder because it is not heat treated. Well I got the C+ which is heat treated, and it looks as though it is working for me.

DeSmet did a nice writeup comparing the wear rates and blood metal levels between the C+ (heat treated) and the BHR (as cast) and the C+ came away as having better wear properties.

My stomach turns at some of the stuff that manufacturers, reps and doctors say about medical devices and drugs.  i.e.  "the ASR was heat treated and failed, thus heat treating is bad". Never-mind that the C+ is heat treated and  is an outstanding device with a great track record.

There is so much money, egos, conjecture and 'opinions' involved that its tough to wade through the marketing and get to the facts. 

[Dannywayoflife]

In the recent video of Dr. Brooks, he says the Birmingham is harder because it is not heat treated. Well I got the C+ which is heat treated, and it looks as though it is working for me.

DeSmet did a nice writeup comparing the wear rates and blood metal levels between the C+ (heat treated) and the BHR (as cast) and the C+ came away as having better wear properties.

My stomach turns at some of the stuff that manufacturers, reps and doctors say about medical devices and drugs.  i.e.  "the ASR was heat treated and failed, thus heat treating is bad". Never-mind that the C+ is heat treated and  is an outstanding device with a great Mtrack record.

Couldn't agree more!

There is so much money, egos, conjecture and 'opinions' involved that its tough to wade through the marketing and get to the facts. 

[ScubaDuck]

That is a great idea to get the metal ion levels before surgery.  Then I can establish a baseline to compare after surgery.  Thanks for the advice.

Dan

[Lopsided]

As an aside, Dannywayoflife, DGossack, and myself, we are all interested in our ion levels, and ...

... we are all called Dan. Is this a trend?

[stano]

My results just came back at 1.0 and 1.2, Dr Gross said that is good for the BHR.

stano

[FlbrkMike]

As an aside, Dannywayoflife, DGossack, and myself, we are all interested in our ion levels, and ...

... we are all called Dan. Is this a trend?

To me it seems like a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

:o

[ScubaDuck]

There are some who call me ...Tim Dan?  LOL

I guess how will see how many MP fans are on here.

Dan

[bdoughty]

Greetings, Dan the Enchanter.

[FlbrkMike]

Well, that's no ordinary ion level.