+-

Author Topic: BHR failures  (Read 2155 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Barbara

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
BHR failures
« on: July 03, 2015, 11:58:04 PM »
I am disappointed to read Dr Brooks very biased note dated 6/5/15. I find his numbers from the UK very hard to swallow. If the US would keep a registry like other countries do, I'm sure we'd find a lot of failures of the BHR. I know of a lot of people, they're just not on this site.
 
Barbara
Barbara
RBHR 10/13/2008. LBHR 12/08/2008. LBHR revision 1/18/2010, LTHR 9/23 2011, RTHR 12/16 2011............
Dr Pritchet, Seattle

Kingrob

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: BHR failures
« Reply #1 on: July 04, 2015, 02:06:30 PM »
Barbara,

I am curious as to what note you are talking about? The only note I could see dated 06/05/15, is titled "Smith & Nephew BHR - No Longer Used in Females and Small Men". I don't see how your comments are applicable to this note.
 
I can understand that woman would be upset about the withdrawal of the smaller size implants by Smith and Nephew. Dr. Brooks is just giving the rationale Smith and Nephew used to make the decision to withdraw these components. He obviously does not agree with this decision.

I think it is widely accepted by the surgeons who have done thousands of these procedures that larger implants have had better results then the smaller ones. The decision to use a smaller size implant should be based on the expertise of the surgeon along with the wishes of the patient. In the hands of an experienced surgeon good results can be expected with the smaller size implants. Like any medical procedure it should be viewed case by case and not just a blanket recall of all the smaller size implants.

Again, I am not sure if this is the note you are talking about. If it is I am confused by your statement about BHR failures in the U.S.. I am not sure how additional failures would make your case stronger to not withdraw the smaller sized implants. Or are you implying that collectively, Hip Resurfacing failures are not being reported accurately? You are not clear in your post.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2015, 09:15:46 PM by Kingrob »

chuckm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
Re: BHR failures
« Reply #2 on: July 04, 2015, 03:57:19 PM »
I agree with Kingrob, are you sure you understood his note, Barbara?

Chuckm
Left BHR 11/30/12
Hospital for Special Surgery
46 years old

Comfortably Numb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
Re: BHR failures
« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2015, 11:55:37 AM »
After several readings of Barbara's post, I've come to the conclusion that she is challenging Dr. Brooks' strong bias in favor of the BHR.  Based upon the people she knows that have had problems and don't post on this site, the numbers would not be nearly as good in favor of the BHR.  And if we kept a better registry in the US, we would presumably find a lot more failures. Looking at the procedures Barbara has had is also somewhat revealing.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2015, 02:45:26 PM by Comfortably Numb »
Right HR, April 29, 2015, Dr. Gross and Lee Webb; Uncemented Biomet Magnum 60/54 and Recap AHA 54;
30 degree angle

chuckm

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
Re: BHR failures
« Reply #4 on: July 05, 2015, 02:58:46 PM »
I have two friends who have had their hips successfully resurfaced and they returned to very active life styles. A US registry would find those people too. Neither person knows about this site and they don't post on others either.

This is just me but it seems like more resurfacing patients stop posting after they become active again and you usually do hear from those who have problems.

Chuckm
Left BHR 11/30/12
Hospital for Special Surgery
46 years old

Kingrob

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: BHR failures
« Reply #5 on: July 05, 2015, 03:39:30 PM »
I did consider that her comments were alluding to false reporting - hence the last sentence in my previous post.  However, Dr. Brooks does not mention failure rates of the BHR only that the standard was moved up from 90% to 95%. If she is in fact doubting the numbers from the UK registry is her solution to start another registry in the U.S. ?

Barbara,

Reading through some of your history I can see you have been through a lot with both your hips. I can understand your frustration and hope you are now doing well. I am sure there is a lot of insight you can provide based on your personal experience. I like to make decisions based on all the facts and am not afraid to consider negative feedback. I need to put aside any personal bias a person may have and try to make a decision based on what I feel are the facts.

Some useful information to me would be how are you doing now. One of the selling points of HR is that if it fails you could get a THR with no problem. Is this true based on your personal experience? In the note that I believe you are referring to - it is really discussing the failure rate of woman who have had HR using a small implant size. Does this describe your situation? I believe you said your procedure was done correctly and it still failed. Are you a smaller female that used a small implant cup size?

In my limited experience with medical procedures - people tend to be more vocal with failures then successful procedures. For example people on this site will post their stories mostly to the point where they recovered and moved on with life. If people have problems they tend to keep posting. I have no reason to doubt the numbers in the UK registry. It is how the data is extrapolated that can be manipulated.

« Last Edit: July 05, 2015, 03:52:16 PM by Kingrob »

 

Recent Posts

Advertisements

Donate Thru Pay Pal

Surface Hippy Gear

Accordion Player Pat Webmaster/Owner

Owner/Webmaster of Surface Hippy

Statcounter

View My Stats

Powered by EzPortal