Hey John,
Metallosis is a serious problem for those of us who have gotten it. The incidence is low, but that doesn't matter to those of us who have had to deal with it.
Having said that, the incidence is very low. The best data that we have comes from the Australian registries, which have been keeping track of problems with hip implants of all types for the last thirteen to fifteen years.
They have the largest data for the procedure and its results. What they have found is that over the span of ten years, the rate of failure for all hip resurfacing was about 8 or 9 percent for all reasons.
That includes all patients, responsible in their recuperation and not, suitable and not. It includes all surgeons, experienced and effective and not. It also includes all devices, those that are highly successful and those that were recalled over that time.
As Arrojo points out, those are not in play any more, and even those had a success rate in the 60-80+ % rate, just not as high as the average.
So you are looking at a high success rate surgery. That does not take away from the fact that some of our hippies have had to deal with metallosis. That is always very sad, but there is a good alternative in that case, revision to a THR which is also a successful device.
The failure rate for metallosis is about 16% of all failures. The largest reasons for failure is not metallosis, but femoral neck breaks and device slips (the bone doesn't grow into the device correctly, so it doesn't "hold" correctly).
If 8% fail over the span of 10 years, then 8 * 0.16 = 1.28% of all HRs fail over the span of 10 years due to metallosis.
Metallosis seems to be best avoided (not in all cases, but seemingly most) by choosing an experienced surgeon. The placement of the device seems to be key in avoiding this.
The failure rates of very good surgeons are nowhere near the 8% quoted, so you may want to ask your prospective surgeon his or her stats for revision and cause of revision.
There are no guarantees, as some of our hippies have found, but the odds are in your favor heavily.
Just my opinion, and it does not take away from the problem itself, as low as its incidence may be.