+-

Author Topic: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption  (Read 2011 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

schmitty8

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« on: March 08, 2008, 04:26:24 PM »
Hell gang - 40 year old active male here.  Had osteoarthritis in left hip pretty bad for the past 10 years.  Planning to have resurface but have heard news recently of the narrowing of the femoral neck post-op due to absorption and is causing a higher incident of fractures.  So, now....I am nervous trying to figure out of resurface is right for me.  Any news/statistics on this complication would be very helpful.

Pat Walter

  • Patricia Walter
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3625
  • Owner/Webmaster of Surface Hippy
    • Surface Hippy
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2008, 11:03:33 PM »
Hi Welcome to Hip Talk

I am assuming you are refering to Dr. Kurtz info - which according to more experienced hip resurfacing surgeons is not correct.

Here is Dr. Bose answer from this page  about 1/2 way down http://www.surfacehippy.info/doctorinterviews/boseinterview.php

Does hip resurfacing have a serious biomechanical disadvantage - namely a small head-neck ratio?Thanks for the mail. I read Dr. Kurtz thoughts on hip resurfacing in his website. His concerns are very valid but I cannot agree with his conclusions.

In short , his concerns only underline the fact that bad results of resurfacing are due to badly done resurfacings.  The head neck ratio is an important determinant of range of movement and prevention of  impingement.  In a patient with normal anatomy, if one is careful to restore anatomy the range will be like pre-0p range of movement before the onset of arthritis. This is a simple concept.

However many patients especially young osteoarthritis will have FAI ( Femoro - Acetabular impingement) as the source of their arthritis. It is  of paramount importance to recognize it and deal with it time of surgery. Again patients with an mild unrecognized slip in their earlier years will have OA in the later years. Here again it is crucial to recognize and deal with it at the time of surgery
 As the head component in a resurfacing is centered on the neck and not the head , correct placement will restore the head neck offset to a large degree. During the surgery the metal cap will look very eccentric on the head.

Surgeons with less experience in resurfacing will think this is wrong and will just put a cap on the translocated head resulting in very low head neck ratio which will lead to problems postop.

In some severe cases , even if done correctly there may not be adequate head neck offset. This is very rare and in this instance one has two choices. In a very young patient , I would trim the ant neck to re-create the offset. In an older patient I would proceed to use a stemmed component with the same acetabular cup. One cannot underestimate the importance of bone conservation in a young patient.

In a patient whose head - neck offset is carefully restored to 'normal ' during surgery and the acetabulum inserted in correct orientation , patient will have 'normal' movement postop. Only a contortionist will need more than 'normal' movement.  Although in theory a large head THR can have supra normal movement, this never happens in clinical situations because apart from the head neck ratio there are many other factors determining ROM like muscle tension etc.

By stating 69 degrees as the functional ROM In resurfacing , is Dr. Kurtz suggesting that resurfacing patients will not be able to sit in a chair as that would require 90 degrees?

The mathematical calculations is very different from actual clinical results in the human body.
The most practical example of this is in India where most patients would sit on the floor even if the surgeon advises them not to as it is a very important social requirement.

We did a study in our unit and found that 20 % of conventional THR were able to sit and 76% of resurfacing patients were able to sit. This again reiterates the importance of surgical technique.

Purely by choosing a particular prosthesis one cannot guarantee a near normal ROM- it has to be installed correctly. However the resurfacing/ anatomical head  is the best tool in the surgeon's hands to restore near normal ROM.
 
Dr. Kurtz also has mentioned component height which would give a prominent head neck junction if not seated. I fully agree with this and it would cause serious problems if not seated. The bottom line is again technique related and one must fully seat the component.
 
The next issue is impingement which he has raised. The concern in very valid because resurfacing acetabular components typically subtend a larger angle at the periphery than conventional THR cups.

Therefore it is more difficult to bury the anterior edge beyond the bone margin in a resurfacing . I would do this in all cases and would never accept ant edge of the cup to be more proud than the bony margin. Therefore the issue of neck- prosthetic impingement does not arise in my opinion. Again is a matter of surgical technique.
 
Some of his statements, are simply not true. - like the ones given below
 
One does not remove more acetabular bone in the acetabulam than in a THR. - if someone is doing this he is doing something seriously wrong. I have explained this concept earlier. If any resurfacing surgeon is doing this he must be condemned.
The incision for resurfacing is not bigger than for THR . It has been published by Derek McMinn that Hip resurfacing can be done by MIS and results are same. See Website

My incisions for both resurfacing and THR is about 10 to 14 cms and the length variability depends on the constitution of the patient and not on the procedure. If a surgeon is using larger incision for resurfacing than for THR, it is not wrong but is in the learning curve of the procedure.   Arguments like  that of the removal of labrum and cutting of the capsule in a resurfacing will cause problems sounds to be weak attempts to pick holes in the outstanding functional results that have so far been achieved in the last 12 yrs in resurfacing. The capsule is not removed in a resurfacing but carefully preserved and stitched back capsule to capsule ( the NCP approach or the neck capsule preserving approach for resurfacing). It is certainly true that the surgeon has to give much more importance to the preservation of neck capsule in resurfacing than in a THR.
 
It appears to me surgeons confuse many aspects of resurfacing. The old poly resurfacings results must not be mixed with the modern metal on metal resurfacings.

There are two dif concept in a resurfacing which was introduced to the orthopedic community at the same time and hence gets mixed up. The first is the use of an anatomical sized bearing. This implies the head diameter to be the same as that of the native head. It is important to understand that the aim is not to put in the biggest sized head that is possible. If a larger than a native size is uses, it will bring a dif. set of problems. Anatomical sized bearing can be done with  a resurfacing or with anatomical metal on metal THR ( people refer to this wrongly as large head --- it is actually the correct head and all other heads are indeed small heads).  Now , currently one can use the BMHR as well. I have attached the pics which illustrates it.  Hip Resurfacing  is not the aim here - the goal is to restore an anatomical bearing which would be best attempt at restoring near normal function. One has to use the best devise to achieve this goal.
 



Restoring an anatomical bearing is the goal in a high value hip.- high value hip means in patient who have a lot of demand out of their hips. An elderly sedentary patient can have any hip and any articulation. It would make no difference. However an wear resistant anatomical bearing is the goal in a patient who has demand of the hip for occupational , recreational or social customs.

This is the first aim. The next issue is of bone conservation . Importance of bone conservation is determined by relative importance of 3 factors, namely the age , the activity level and the bone stock. Bone preservation is not a static concept. Bone conservation would be of immeasurable value in a 25 yrs old and would be probably be a contraindicated in 80 yrs old due to the risk of femoral neck fracture. I have attached a pic to illustrate this point.



Thus there are two dif issues here - the use of an anatomical sized bearing & bone conservation. These are independent issues . As both these concepts came simultaneously with the advent of resurfacing there has been a hotch-potch with many confusing these two.

Webmaster/Owner of Surface Hippy
3/15/06 LBHR De Smet

Pat Walter

  • Patricia Walter
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3625
  • Owner/Webmaster of Surface Hippy
    • Surface Hippy
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2008, 11:12:49 PM »
Hi

Here are the most recent BHR Survivorship stats http://www.surfacehippy.info/vmbhrhistoryinfo.php

In reality, from the 7000 + people posting on the Yahoo Surface Hippy group - by far the largest problem with not femur neck fractures, it is loose acetabulum cups.  There have been over 12 reported so far. 

Do realize these stats about the loose cups are only from people posting on the Yahoo Discussion Group - not some fancy medical study.  I have had people write to me personally that tell me that are getting a revision because of the problem.

So if you take some time and read all the stats and even join the Yahoo Group - you will seldom hear about femur neck fractures any more.  Normally accoring to the medical studies they only happen during the early surgeries of the learning curve for the newer hip resurfacing surgeons.  You can get on the national registries in other countries and read what the problems were and what caused them.  The australian registry stats are posted on the above page.

I would take time to read a lot of stories and ask a lot of quesitons of the doctors.  Ask their opinion about the femur neck problem.  It is not a big concern after a doctor is experienced.

Of course, I am not medically trained, but read a whole lot over the past 3 years.  I talked with my Doctor, De Smet of Belgium that has done over 3000+ hip resurfacings.  The experienced doctors will be honest with you.  Dr. De Smets stats are listed on his website.  Something US doctors don't do.

I hope you will keep an open mind, do a lot of reading and ask a lot of questions. You are very young to be considering a THR.  I was 61 when I had my BHR and felt I was still too young for a THR.

Good Luck.

Pat
Webmaster/Owner of Surface Hippy
3/15/06 LBHR De Smet

Pat Walter

  • Patricia Walter
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3625
  • Owner/Webmaster of Surface Hippy
    • Surface Hippy
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2008, 11:45:17 PM »
Hi

I found the rest of the Doctors replies including Dr. Su, Rogerson and Bose

Here is the page  http://www.surfacehippy.info/faqsmallheadneckration.php

I hope that helps you and gives you a different perspective about hip resurfacing. 

Many athletes have received hip resurfacing and were not concerned about the femur neck narrowing  http://www.surfacehippy.info/athletes.php   Over 90.000+ have BHRs and have not been concerned about it.

I think that is one doctors view and according the the wonderfully experinced hip resurfacing surgeons, it is not a correct view. 

I would be less worried about that problem than I would be about a revision some time later in my life if I were only 40.  Each revision becomes more difficult. At least if you start with a hip resurfacing, you keep you complete femur bone so if you should ever need a revivsion - the first one is much easier.   Have you ever seen what is involved in revising a THR - breaking the bone apart to get the long stem out - then making the hold for the stem larger and longer for the revision, then wiring it back together??
http://www.surfacehippy.info/thrrevision.php

Just the thought of that was enough for me to want to start out with a hip resurfacing.

Each doctor on my Doctors interview page talks about why they feel a hip resurfacing is better than a thr  http://www.surfacehippy.info/doctorinterviews/doctorinterviews.php   That would make some good reading to give you the view of some experienced hip resurfacing surgeons.

I hope that helps.

Pat
Webmaster/Owner of Surface Hippy
3/15/06 LBHR De Smet

schmitty8

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2008, 03:43:50 AM »
Wow Pat.  Thanks for your time.  It still concerns me, but I agree, a good doctor should be able to reduce the risk of femoral neck fracture.  I think I had it wrong...I said absorption and I believe it it resorption.....Seems you knew what i was talking about which is narrowing of the neck over time and creating a higher incident of neck fracture.  There seems to be some info on the web.  I have a good friend that distributes for Wright Medical....they have the Conserve Plus system.

I know you have a BHR...as do many others.  I have heard good things about the Wright Med Implant as well.....Conserve Plus and I am planning to have Dr Bill Bose (Mobile, AL) do it as he is apparently the best in the region (SOutheast) at resurface.

Pat Walter

  • Patricia Walter
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3625
  • Owner/Webmaster of Surface Hippy
    • Surface Hippy
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2008, 12:06:57 PM »
Hi

If you have a good friend that that is a sales rep for the Wright C+ system - ask him the same questions.  He/she should have plenty of good information for you.

The Wright C + is very well used and there are many happy hippies with the C+.  You can look at both my age chart http://www.surfacehippy.info/agesurvey.php  and the Yahoo Survery of 855 surface hippies http://www.surfacehippy.info/survey/hipresurfacingsurvey.phpm to see how many got the Wright C+     Dr. De Smet often uses it when there is not the right sized BHR available.  Doctors have to give you just the right size or you could end up with a shorter leg.

Pump your friend about hip resurfacing info.  He/she is on the frontline and will know a lot about resurfacing and the doctors.

Pat
Webmaster/Owner of Surface Hippy
3/15/06 LBHR De Smet

blondie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Femoral Neck Fracture due to hip absorption
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2008, 04:42:49 AM »
 Hi Schmitty8.....My name is karen and I had my right hip resurfaced 8/29/06 with Dr. Harlam Amstutz. I have a Wright Conserve + prosthesis in my right hip which was designed and Patented by Dr. Amstutz.  I am a dancer and
still dancing jazz and have had not problems at all with my prosthesis.  My risk of fracture was 15% since i have severe
osteoporosis -3.5 bone density in the femur....i did not care....this is a bone conserving surgery and i wanted my femoral neck in tact. I took the chance and precautions not to fracture. There are always going to be pros and cons but
you have to admit that to fix a hang nail you would not chop off your finger....so the analogy applies to your hip ...resurface it and do the pt and precautions is better than chopping off the femur instead of resurfacing an already
good one that is yours....just my two cents. Karen

RHR Conserve +
Amstutz 8/29/06

 

Mission Statement
Surface Hippy presents information about hip resurfacing. It does not provide medical advice.
It is designed to support, not to replace, the relationship between patient and clinician.
Advertising - Revenue from this site is derived from commercial advertising and individual donations. Any advertisement is distinguished by the word "advertisement"
Privacy - Surface Hippy does not share email addresses or personal information with any group or organization.
Content - Surface Hippy is not controlled or influenced by any medical companies, doctors or hospitals.
All content is controlled by Patricia Walter - Joint Health Sites LLC 2005 - 2018 Web design by Patricia Walter.

Hip TalkModeration

Authority

The Hip Talk Discussion Group or forum is moderated on a Daily basis by Patricia Walter.

The moderator and forum members are not regarded as health professionals.

Complementarity

The information provided on this forum is designed to support, not replace, the direct relationship between patients and health professionals.

Privacy

We remind you that this forum is public and any message can be read, used, reproduced and cited by all.
You do have the option to delete your messages. However, under exceptional circumstances, you can contact the moderator to do so. Thus, please take care regarding the information that you post.

Messages

The moderator and members should conduct themselves at all times with respect and honesty.

By using our forums, you agree to post information that is true and correct to the best of your knowledge and is of your personal experience. If the information you post is not personal experience, we request you to provide sources (references, links, etc..) whenever it is relevant and possible.

You are not allowed to post advertisements, whether in the form of text links or banners, for example.

Please keep your comments positive and polite. If you have a disagreement with another forum member, moderator or the site owner; please use the the private message feature of this forum or email the member. We try to avoid emotional conflicts on the discussion group and we will do so by removing posts and banning those that cause problems.

The moderator reserves the right to delete any messages deemed inappropriate without notifying the author. In cases of abuse, the moderator reserve the right to ban a member of the forum. In both instances, an explanation will be provided if user requests.

Advertisements

Hip Resurfacing at Cleveland Clinic

Dr. Pritchett Hip Resurfacing Doctor

Dr. Gross Hip Resurfacing Doctor




Powered by EzPortal
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk