New hip implants no better than traditional implants

New hip implants appear to have no advantage over traditional implants, suggests a review of the evidence published in the British Medical Journal today.

And some evidence shows that new implants may be associated with higher rates of revision surgery.

While is a successful operation, substantial numbers of patients require revision surgery within 10 years to replace the implant because of infection, dislocation, wear, instability, loosening, or other mechanical failures.

Traditional hip implants with metal on polyethylene or ceramic on polyethylene bearing surfaces are associated with low revision rates. Newer alternatives with metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic bearings are available, but their advantage over traditional implants is still not clear.

There have also been severe cases of accumulation of in tissues of patients with metal on metal hip implants, leading the to call for better regulation of medical devices. And in 2009, the US (FDA) initiated a comprehensive review of the evidence for approved hip implants.

Working with the FDA, a team of researchers led by Professor Art Sedrakyan set out to compare the safety and effectiveness of hip implants with different bearing surfaces.

They analysed the results of 18 studies involving 3,139 patients and over 830,000 operations in annual reports of registries.

They found that functional outcomes (ability to carry out usual daily activities) and general quality of life scores were no different between patients with the new metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic hip implants compared with traditional hip implants.

While one study reported fewer dislocations associated with metal on , in the three largest national registries there was evidence of higher rates of implant revision associated with metal on metal implants compared with traditional metal on polyethylene implants.

One trial reported fewer revisions with ceramic on ceramic compared with metal on implants, but data from national registries did not support this finding.

The authors conclude: "There is limited evidence regarding comparative effectiveness of various hip implant bearings, and the results do not indicate any advantage for metal on metal or ceramic on ceramic implants compared with traditional bearings."

They call for a large randomised trial of bearing surfaces before any claims of benefit are made.

Until then, they say "national registries provide important real world data that are critical for the safety and future comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation."

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

You have your MoM's ions

Mar 09, 2010

Hip replacement patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) implants (both the socket and hip ball are metal) pass metal ions to their infants during pregnancy, according to a new study presented today at the 2010 Annual Meeting of ...

UK says metal hip replacements more troublesome

Sep 16, 2011

(AP) -- People who get metal hip replacements are more likely to need a replacement compared to those who get a traditional plastic one, according to a new report from a large British registry.

Hip, thigh implants can raise bone fracture risk in children

Feb 16, 2011

Children with hip and thigh implants designed to help heal a broken bone or correct other bone conditions are at risk for subsequent fractures of the very bones that the implants were intended to treat, according to new research ...

Heavy metal: Titanium implant safety under scrutiny

Jul 25, 2011

A new strategy to quantify the levels of titanium in the blood of patients fitted with titanium orthopaedic implants is presented in Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, a Springer journal. Yoana Nuevo-Ordóñez and co ...

Recommended for you

New approach to particle therapy dosimetry

Dec 19, 2014

Researchers at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL), in collaboration with EMRP partners, are working towards a universal approach to particle beam therapy dosimetry.

Supplement maker admits lying about ingredients

Dec 17, 2014

Federal prosecutors say the owner and president of a dietary supplement company has admitted his role in the sale of diluted and adulterated dietary ingredients and supplements sold by his company.

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.