Ok, got my Quest test results back today for chromium and cobalt.
.8 Chromium <=1.2
.8 Cobalt <=1.8
If I am not mistaken the range numbers are for the general population, I am less than the general population I would think.
I have not heard back from Lee and Dr. Gross yet on the x-rays, but they look exactly like my x-rays from 3 1/2 years ago.
Chuck
Wow thats awesome chuck!
Excellent news. Thanks for sharing!
That is excellent. Congrats Chuck, really good news.
Awesome news Chuck - you must be stoked! I would be.
Before you know it....they'll be telling you of your Cobalt/Chromium deficiency and put you on supplements! Keep up the good work!
Bruce ~8^)
Great report Chuck. :)
With all the talk about metal ions, it is very important to get confirmation out there that a well functioning MOM resurfacing need not lead to high ion numbers, and in our case, numbers well in the mid-range for the general population. I continue to believe that the FDA requiring extensive reporting on metal ion numbers could be the best thing that could possibly happen for resurfacing, since hopefully it will show large numbers of results like yours among the well designed and placed devices.
Thanks for sharing this!
Thanks John, yes I think in the end the FDA will see that it's the misaligned hip implants that are cause that lead to high metal ion issues.
To be honest with you, even had the numbers been a little high I would not have done anything. I've been more active this year than other years, even in the winter I do a lot of cardio and I've been running on a basketball court too.
Thanks to everyone for the comments.
Chuck
Quote from: John C on April 10, 2012, 11:00:49 AM
Great report Chuck. :)
With all the talk about metal ions, it is very important to get confirmation out there that a well functioning MOM resurfacing need not lead to high ion numbers, and in our case, numbers well in the mid-range for the general population. I continue to believe that the FDA requiring extensive reporting on metal ion numbers could be the best thing that could possibly happen for resurfacing, since hopefully it will show large numbers of results like yours among the well designed and placed devices.
Thanks for sharing this!
Wow! Not that I was particularly worried, but it's still good to see these kinds of numbers!
Good news! But then again, I suppose this should be expected from a well done HR.
The thing that weirds me out about all this, is that the "common wisdom" today in the US seems to have shifted to the view that hip resurfacing isn't even a viable option. For example, in a thread I saw in a climbing forum, where some guy asked about the possibility of HR, the general "mood" in the thread seemed to be that HR was too risky and didn't work very well. One of the "knowledgeable" posters said that doctors in the US won't even do the surgery because of the risks involved.
Good thing this forum exists so an interested outsider can learn something about the realities of HR.
True, Tim - how're you feeling? Back home now, right?
Good point John - I think we need a large data set with numbers like Chuck's. I assume those are in ug/L or equivalent. Sorry I'm a fuss budget about units. BTW - that's good news Chuck.
You would be surprised of what has tried to wedge it's way on to this forum, you would be very surprised. Money talks and there are many attorneys that would love to trash every MOM hip device so they can make money from the settlements.
MOM hip resurfacing is very much under attack.
Chuck
Quote from: Tim Bratten on April 11, 2012, 11:57:31 AM
Good thing this forum exists so an interested outsider can learn something about the realities of HR.
Quote from: hernanu on April 11, 2012, 12:12:27 PM
True, Tim - how're you feeling? Back home now, right?
Home since March 2. Right now I'm 8 weeks post-op and, well, seems I'm doing great. Yesterday went for my first "long" hike without the trekking poles (just 2 miles, so as to not push too hard) and this weekend (if the weather cooperates) I'll do my first outdoors rockclimbing.
Cheers
Tim