Figures
Abstract
Introduction
The use of metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) increased in the last decades. A release of metal products (i.e. particles, ions, metallo-organic compounds) in these implants may cause local and/or systemic adverse reactions. Metal ion concentrations in body fluids are surrogate measures of metal exposure.
Objective
To systematically summarize and critically appraise published studies concerning metal ion concentrations after MoM THA.
Methods
Systematic review of clinical trials (RCTs) and epidemiological studies with assessment of metal ion levels (cobalt, chromium, titanium, nickel, molybdenum) in body fluids after implantation of metalliferous hip replacements. Systematic search in PubMed and Embase in January 2012 supplemented by hand search. Standardized abstraction of pre- and postoperative metal ion concentrations stratified by type of bearing (primary explanatory factor), patient characteristics as well as study quality characteristics (secondary explanatory factors).
Results
Overall, 104 studies (11 RCTs, 93 epidemiological studies) totaling 9.957 patients with measurement of metal ions in body fluids were identified and analyzed. Consistently, median metal ion concentrations were persistently elevated after implantation of MoM-bearings in all investigated mediums (whole blood, serum, plasma, erythrocytes, urine) irrespective of patient characteristics and study characteristics. In several studies very high serum cobalt concentrations above 50 µg/L were measured (detection limit typically 0.3 µg/L). Highest metal ion concentrations were observed after treatment with stemmed large-head MoM-implants and hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
Discussion
Due to the risk of local and systemic accumulation of metallic products after treatment with MoM-bearing, risk and benefits should be carefully balanced preoperatively. The authors support a proposed „time out“ for stemmed large-head MoM-THA and recommend a restricted indication for hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Patients with implanted MoM-bearing should receive regular and standardized monitoring of metal ion concentrations. Further research is indicated especially with regard to potential systemic reactions due to accumulation of metal products.
Citation: Hartmann A, Hannemann F, Lützner J, Seidler A, Drexler H, Günther K-P, et al. (2013) Metal Ion Concentrations in Body Fluids after Implantation of Hip Replacements with Metal-on-Metal Bearing – Systematic Review of Clinical and Epidemiological Studies. PLoS ONE 8(8): e70359. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070359
Editor: Jo Gagnier el Joseph, University of Michigan, United States of America
Received: February 14, 2013; Accepted: June 16, 2013; Published: August 7, 2013
Copyright: © 2013 Hartmann et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The project was funded by the German Osteoarthritis Society (http://www.arthrose.de/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: AH: remuneration for lecture Aesculap, Zimmer; paid consultancy for this work by German Osteoarthritis Society. FH: Paid employment for this work by German Osteoarthritis Society. JL: Financial support for educational activities (Aesculap, Bayer, Mathys) and re-search funding (Aesculap, Mathys, Smith & Nephew, Stryker). AS: Paid consultancy for this work by German Osteoarthritis Society. HD: none. KPG: Financial support for educational activities (Aesculap, Link, Zimmer) and re-search funding (Aesculap, DePuy, Smith & Nephew, Zimmer). JS: Paid consultancy for this work by German Osteoarthritis Society. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Introduction
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with osteoarthritis is one of the most successful surgical interventions in general inducing substantial improvement of health-related quality of life of affected patients [1]. Aseptic loosening is a typical long-term complication that significantly determines implant survival. Compared to regular bearings with conventional polyethylene, one advantage of metal-on-metal (MoM) bearings is that they produce less volumetric wear [2]. However, MoM hip replacements may release metallic products (i.e. particles, ions, metallo-organic compounds) due to wear and corrosion [3], [4]. Metal ions from the corresponding alloying element (i.e. cobalt – Co, chromium – Cr, titanium – Ti, nickel – Ni, molybdenum – Mo) can be measured in the joint itself as well as in surrounding tissue and body fluids, and may potentially cause local and or/systemic adverse reactions [5], [6], [7], [8]. Recently, metal-related local adverse reactions (i.e. adverse reactions to metal debris, ARMD) in patients with MoM hip replacement gained substantial scientific and public attention [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Endoprothesis registries from Australia and the UK [15], [16], [17] indicated increased revision rates following hip replacements with MoM-bearing – especially large-head THA and hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The risk of local adverse reactions of MoM-THA has been reported to correlate with the level of systemic metal ion concentrations [5], [6], [8], [13], [18], [19], [20]. However, several clinically relevant issues related to the safety of MoM-THA such as the impact of the different types of MoM implants on metal ion concentrations and related risks and the long-term course of postoperative metal ion concentrations require further investigation. Case reports [21], [22] also suggest systemic risks due to metal burden after MoM-THA, but systematic research on this important issue is missing. There is substantial evidence from occupational medicine indicating that employees in metal producing and -processing plants exposured to chromium(VI) resp. cobalt compounds are at increased risk of nasal septum ulcerations, lung cancer resp. and cardiomyopathy [23], [24], [25]. It has to be noted, however, that toxicity of Cr(III) compounds is substantially lower than those of Cr(VI) compounds. Because the primary route of metal exposure in occupational medicine is the respiratory tract, generalizability of these findings to patients with metallic hip replacement remains unclear.
Despite the current uncertainty a systematic review on the safety of MoM-hip replacements is missing. We systematically appraised published clinical and epidemiologic studies to clarify the following issues related to the safety of MoM-hip replacement:
- What are median and maximum metal ion concentrations following MoM-hip replacement?
- Which patient and implant related risk factors exist for elevated metal ion concentrations following MoM-hip replacement?
- To what extent does the metal ion concentration after MoM-hip replacement predict local and systemic adverse reactions?
Methods
We undertook a systematic review to identify, summarize, and critically appraise the clinical and epidemiological evidence concerning the impact of metalliferous hip replacements on metal ion levels in body fluids. In addition to the type of bearing as the hypothesized determinant of metal ion concentrations we were particularly interested in patient characteristics as well as study quality characteristics as potential secondary determinants of metal ion concentrations after THR, and in the clinical consequences resulting from increased metal ion concentrations.
Inclusion criteria
All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and epidemiological studies (cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies, case series) with metal ion measurement (cobalt, chromium, titanium, nickel, molybdenum) in body fluids (full blood, serum, plasma, erythrocytes, synovia, urine) after implantation of metalliferous hip replacements in at least 20 patients were considered eligible. Studies were required to be published as an original article in English, German, or French language to be included.
Literature search
Systematic electronic literature searches were conducted in PubMed and EMBASE (until January 19, 2012). Combinations of MeSH-terms were used to identify relevant trials with a high sensitivity. The exact search string used is provided in table 1. Systematic electronic search was supplemented by hand search in the reference lists of the papers included, as well as all articles published in the „Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British“ between 2007 and 2011.Screening of titles and abstracts as well as full-text articles was done independently by two reviewers (F.H., A.H.). Disagreements were resolved by discussing within the whole team of reviewers.
Data abstraction
The following information was abstracted from the studies included using standardized and beta tested evidence tables:
- study characteristics (e.g. author, geographical region, study design, time points of assessment, follow-up period).
- Patient characteristics (e.g. number of patients included and followed up to each point of assessment of metal ion level, UCLA – University of California Los Angeles score [26], body mass index).
- Implant characteristics (type of bearing material and head size in three different groups of implants: small head (SH-)THA with head diameter ≤32 mm, stemmed large-head (LH-)THA with head diameter ≥36 mm, HRA).
- Implant position (inclination of acetabular cup in the frontal plane).
- Details on metal ion assessment, i.e. type of metal ions assessed (cobalt, chromium, titanium, nickel, molybdenum), the medium of assessment, method of analysis, metal ion levels (median, mean, interquartile range (IQR), outliers, definition of outliers.
- Clinical results, i.e. local adverse reactions such as ARMD – „adverse reactions to metal debris”, systemic adverse reactions.
Rating of methodological study quality
Standardized study quality assessment was based on the CASP und SIGN Checklists [27], [28]. Based on consented and a priori defined study quality criteria the risk of bias was rated for each study with the following categories:
- very low risk of bias: „++“
- low risk of bias: „+“
- high risk of bias: „−“
We considered the following criteria to increase the risk of bias:
- no consideration of confounding and/or explanatory factors such as other metallic implants, type, size, and position of implant.
- missing information on the methods used to measure metal ion levels.
- missing reference group without THR.
- missing preoperative (baseline) metal ion assessment.
- missing outcome data, i.e. loss to follow-up >10% [29].
Evidence-synthesis
The qualitative evidence-synthesis included a comparison of the pre- vs. postoperative metal ion concentrations (median (alternatively: mean), IQR, maximum values) stratified by type of bearing as the primary explanatory factor. Patient characteristics (mean age, sex ratio) and implant characteristics (bearing size and position) were considered as secondary explanatory factors. Additionally, the definition of cut-off levels of metal ion concentrations in different studies was compared.
RCTs and epidemiological studies were analyzed separately. The detection limit of metal ions depends on the method and device used. The range of the detection limits reported and the handling of values below the detection rate was also part of the qualitative synthesis of the published evidence.
The course of metal ions in body fluids over time was assessed based on studies reporting baseline serum Co-values and at least 2 postoperative Co-measurements. In these studies, we investigated the course of median serum Co-concentration after implantation of hip replacements with different kinds of metal-on-metal bearings.
Metal ion concentrations in all tables and figures below generally relate to patients with unilateral THR, unless stated differently. We initially planned to conduct a quantitative summary (meta-analysis) of the results of qualitatively homogeneous studies with very low or low risk of bias.
Data on all relevant metal ions (cobalt, chromium, titanium, nickel, molybdenum) was extracted from the studies included. In the results section, we present cobalt levels as the proposed reference metal ion concentration after THR, as suggested by an international, multiprofessional expert panel [30].
Results
Figure 1 summarizes the yield of systematic search and study selection [31]. Overall, 104 studies (11 RCTs, 14 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 55 cross-sectional studies, 23 case series) totaling 9.957 patients with measurement of metal ions in body fluids were identified and analyzed. The majority of studies were performed in Europe (n = 71) and North America (n = 26).
Figure 1 summarizes the yield of systematic search and study selection [31]. Overall, 104 studies (11 RCTs, 14 cohort studies, 1 case-control study, 55 cross-sectional studies, 2 case series) were identified and analyzed.
Study characteristics RCTs
Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the 11 RCTs included. RCTs were generally small and included between 13 and 117 patients. Two RCTs examined MoM vs. ceramic-polyethylene (CoP) [32], [33], five studies MoM vs. metal-polyethylene (MoP) [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], two studies examined MoM vs. ceramic-ceramic (CoC) [26], [40], [41], and two MoM vs. hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) [42], [43], [44]. LH-THA was investigated in one US-American study [35]. All other RCTs investigated MoM SH-THA.
Despite some methodological limitations such as missing description of patient recruitment/randomization, incomplete information on patient characteristics, and incomplete outcome data, all RCTs were considered as having low risk of bias (Table 2).
Determination of metal ions in RCTs
Table 3 presents details of metal ion assessment in the RCTs included. All RCTs reported pre- and postoperative Co-concentrations. Nine [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [38], [39], [40], [41], [43], [44] RCTs preferred serum as medium for metal ion assessment. Long-term measurement ≥24 months were reported in five RCTs.[33], [36], [37], [38], [39], [41].
As detailed in table 4, median Co-concentrations were elevated at each postoperative assessment after implantation of MoM SH-THA, MoM LH-THA, and HRA compared to THA with only one or without metallic part of the bearing. Following MoM SH-THA median serum Co-concentrations varied between 0.66–1.0 µg/L at 6 months [32], [33], [34], [35] and 0.73–1.2 µg/L at 2 years [33], [34], [35], [41] after surgery. After MoM LH-THA median serum Co-levels of 0.66 µg/l and 0.73 µg/L were reported at 6-month and 2-year follow-up, respectively [35]. After HRA, median whole blood Co-concentrations varied between 0.78 and 1.3 µg/L up six months und between 0.16 and 1.2 µg/L two years postoperatively [42], [43], [44]. The only direct comparison between MoM SH- and LH-THA revealed no relevant differences in the median serum Co-concentration [35].
Two RCTs directly compared MoM SH-THA vs. HRA and revealed qualitatively different results: While Smolders et al. [42] observed higher median and maximum Co-concentrations following HRA compared to MoM SH-THA, Vendittoli et al.[43], [44] did not observe relevant differences in mean Co-concentrations following HRA and MoM SH-THA. THA with only one metallic part of the bearing resulted in not or only slightly elevated serum Co-concentrations (Table 4).
Study characteristics epidemiological studies
Table 5 summarizes aggregated characteristics of the epidemiological studies included. Table 6 provides details of the characteristics of each epidemiological study included. Metal ion concentrations following HRA were reported in 48 studies (52%). Information on inclination and anteversion were reported in 30 studies (32%) and in 16 (17%) studies, respectively. Information on mean age was reported in 66 studies (71%). The sex distribution of patients was reported in 64 studies (69%) and varied substantially with 19 to 90% of the study populations being female.
The vast majority of studies (n = 86; 83%) had significant methodological shortcomings such as a lack of reference group, lack of preoperative baseline assessment, lack of essential information on implant characteristics or metal ion measurement, and/or insufficient follow-up rates and were therefore considered as having a high risk of bias.
Determination of metal ions in epidemiological studies
87 and 85 epidemiological studies reported Co and Cr values following hip replacement, respectively. No study differentiated between Cr(III) and Cr(VI). Metal ion concentration was most often measured in whole blood (n = 51), serum (n = 47), and urine (n = 19). Few studies investigated ion levels in erythrocytes (n = 2), plasma (n = 5), or in synovia (n = 3). Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) was used in 56 studies (60%), atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS) in 33 studies (36%), and inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES) resp. inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) in three studies for metal ion detection. Only 24studies (26%) reported preoperative (baseline) metal ion concentrations. For more details on metal ion assessment in the epidemiological studies included please refer to table 7.
Metal ion concentrations in epidemiological studies
Table 8 summarizes median serum Co-concentrations, 75th percentiles, and maximum values of Co-concentrations before and after hip replacement stratified by the type of intervention (MoM SH-THA, MoM LH-THA, HRA). After MoM SH-THA median Co-concentrations varied between 0.65 and 1.5 µg/L at six months and between 0.7 and 1.7 µg/L two years postoperatively [42], [45], [46]. After HRA, median serum Co-concentrations varied between 1.12 and 3.7 µg/L six months and between 0.54 and 4.28 µg/L two years postoperatively indicating higher Co-levels after HRA vs. MoM SH-THA [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50]. Median Co-concentrations after MoM LH-THA varied between 0.7 and 3.26 µg/L six months and between 3.77 and 5.38 µg/L two years postoperatively [48], [49], [51].
One important result of our systematic review is that the maximum serum Co-levels were consistently higher at all postoperative assessments in patients who received MoM LH-THA [13], [48], [49], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55] and HRA [6], [7], [13], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [53], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60] compared to patients who received MoM SH-THA [45], [46], [50], [52], [56], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67] (Table 8).
Tables 9 and 10 summarize the results of comparative epidemiological studies. In accordance with these indirect comparisons from epidemiological studies, median Co-concentrations following MoM LH-THA and HRA tended to be higher compared to MoM SH-THA. Consistently, MoM LH-THA, MoM SH-THA, and HRA resulted in higher metal ion concentrations than THA with CoP, CoC, and MoP-implants.
Conclusions on the role of patient characteristics (age, sex) on metal ion concentration could not be drawn due to a lack of standardization in the design and reporting of the epidemiological studies included.
The levels of Cr and other metal ions showed similar distributions and lead to the same conclusions as the Co-ion levels reported (data available on request from the corresponding author).
Course of metal ion concentration pre- vs. postoperative
Figure 2 provides an overview of the course of metal ion concentrations in studies reporting baseline serum Co-values and at least 2 postoperative Co-measurements. All MoM-interventions showed an increase in median serum Co-concentration. Again, highest median levels were observed in patients with HRA or MoM LH-THA. In some studies median Co-concentrations peaked at 12 months follow-up and declined thereafter. Other studies showed stable (increased) median serum Co-concentrations until 4-years follow-up.
Figure 2 provides an overview of the course of metal ion concentrations in studies reporting baseline serum Co-values and at least 2 postoperative Co-measurements. All MoM-interventions showed an increase in median serum Co-concentration. Again, highest median levels were observed in patients with HRA or MoM LH-THA. In some studies median Co-concentrations peaked at 12 months follow-up and declined thereafter. Other studies showed stable (increased) median serum Co-concentrations until 4-years follow-up.
Maximum Co-concentrations in epidemiological studies
Authors applied different definitions of outlier/extreme values of Co-concentration ranging between 0.25 and 124.9 µg/L for all bearings. Details on the reported maximum Co-concentrations in epidemiological studies are provided in table 11. MoP THA generally resulted in lower extreme values than MoM hip replacements. In studies investigating MoM SH-THA maximum Co-concentrations ranged between 0.72 and 26.0 µg/L. The highest Co-concentrations were observed after MoM LH THA (range of maximum values: 1.8–79.3 µg/L) and after HRA (range of maximum values: 1.4–124.9).
Due to substantial differences in the design, interventions, methods of metal ion assessment, study populations and study reporting, we considered statistical meta-analysis not to be indicated.
Local clinical reactions
Local metal-related adverse reactions were reported in 9 epidemiological studies [5], [6], [13], [19], [20], [53], [55], [68], [69]. As summarized in table 12 ARMD, metallosis and pseudotumors were the most frequently reported metal-related adverse reactions. Six studies reported Co-concentrations in well and poorly functioning implants [5], [18], [19], [20], [53]. Cases with local metal-related adverse reactions (poorly functioning implants) had consistently higher metal ion concentrations than patients with well-functioning THA (Figure 3).
Cases with local metal-related adverse reactions (poorly functioning implants) had consistently higher metal ion concentrations than patients with well-functioning THA.
Systemic clinical reactions
Five studies [61], [62], [70], [71], [72] examined possible associations between metal ion concentrations and nephrotoxicity. Daniel et al. [71] examined renal clearance and renal concentrating efficiency of cobalt. The renal efficiency, i.e. the ratio of urine cobalt concentration to plasma cobalt concentration, was 0.9 (IQR 0.7–1.6) for preoperative controls and 3.2 (IQR 1.7–5.1) in patients with MoM THA or HRA. No threshold was endorsed at which renal capacity is overextended. Corradi et al. [70] examined metal ion concentrations in whole blood and renal markers in patients with HRA and in healthy controls. The median Co-excretion in patients with HRA was 12.9 µg/24-h urine (range 6.1–71.5 µg). No elevated renal markers were found in comparison with controls. Gruebl et al. and Marker et al. [61], [62] investigated serum metal ions, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine in overlapping cohorts of patients with MoM THA. The median (range) serum creatinine value preoperatively and at 10 years follow-up was 0.88 mg/dL (0.63–1.21 mg/dL) and 0.86 mg/dL (0.55–1.51 mg/dL), respectively. Evidence for or against further systemic toxicity or carcinogenicity could not be revealed from the studies included.
Discussion
As highlighted in this comprehensive systematic review, there is substantial and consistent evidence that patients receiving hip replacement with a MoM-bearing are at increased risk for systemic accumulation of metallic products. In the 104 studies analyzed, median metal ion concentrations were persistently elevated after implantation of MoM-bearings in all investigated mediums (whole blood, serum, plasma, erythrocytes, urine), irrespective of patient characteristics and study characteristics.
Overall, metal ion concentrations in body fluids were assessed in 9.957 patients in the 11 RCTs and 93 epidemiological studies included in this review. Despite heterogeneity in the study designs, techniques and medium of metal ion assessment, investigators consistently observed elevated median/mean metal ion concentrations after MoM THA and HRA compared to baseline, i.e. before surgery. Metal-free hip replacements did not result in increased metal ion levels. Metal ion concentrations following MoP and MoC THA were much lower compared to MoM THA or HRA.
One important finding from this review is that stemmed large-head MoM-implants and HRA tended to result in higher Co-concentrations than small-head MoM-implants. In several studies very high serum cobalt concentrations above 50 µg/L were measured in patients who had received large-head MoM-implants or HRA.
These findings have significant clinical relevance, as increased metal ion concentrations translate into increased risk for the development of local adverse reactions such as ARMD. In many cases ARMD results in the indication for the revision of MoM-implants.[13] One current issue of debate is the definition of a cutoff cobalt level, above which revision should be considered.
Hart et al. [8], [18], [30] recommend a serum cobalt threshold level of 4.97 µg/L based on ROC-curve analyses. However, no explicit advice is given on how to treat patients above this value. Recommendations of present literature currently state Co-concentrations in serum or plasma greater 2 up to 7 µg/L as a predictor for a subjectively adverse outcome and an increased risk of MoM-specific complications [8], [18], [30], [73].
While MoM SH-THA (head diameter ≤32 mm) seem to show similar long-term survival rates as hip replacement with other bearings [61], [74], [75], [76], [77], the implantation of stemmed LH-THA (head diameter ≥36 mm) is associated with significantly higher short-term revision rates in clinical studies as well as arthroplasty registries [15], [16], [17], [44], [45], [48], [68], [78], [79]. The elevated release of metal products in these stemmed LH-implants may be due to fretting corrosion at the head-taper-junction in addition to a metal particle release from bearing surfaces.
Beside local tissue damages, it is important to gain better understanding about the potential systemic adverse effects induced by metal ion accumulation, i.e. toxicity, carcinogenicity, teratogenicity. The degree to which increased metal ion concentrations after MoM THA translate into increased risk for systemic toxicity cannot be sufficiently answered based on the studies identified and analyzed in this review. Until now, epidemiological studies have not revealed clinically relevant toxic damages of the kidney, heart or nervous system after MoM THA [45], [58]-[60]. Case reports, however, indicate the possibility of metal-induced cardiomyopathy [21], [22]. An elevated risk of incident cancer following hip replacements with MoM bearing could not be identified yet [80], [81], [82], but studies may have been underpowered.
There is substantial evidence that occupational metal exposure is related to increased cancer risk. It has to be noted, however, that bioavailability of Cr(III) compounds is substantially lower than those of Cr(VI) compounds. Cr(VI) compounds are able to infiltrate into cells due to transmembrane motion and to operate genotoxic following reduction to Cr(III). Carbid metal workers exposed to Co are at increased risk for fatal lung cancer [83]; the „International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)“ classified Co to be possibly carcinogenic. Persons being occupationally exposed to Co have higher Co urine concentrations when compared to the general population. It should be noted that specific attentiveness was laid on possibly elevated Cr(VI) in body fluids due to ascertained carcinogenicity of Cr(VI) compounds. Due to considerable differences in exposure routes, the effects of increased metal ion concentrations as a consequence of MoM hip replacement cannot be directly compared with the systemic effects of occupationally acquired (mainly inhaled) metals.
Strengths and weaknesses of this review
This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA checklist [31]. Systematic literature search and assessment of eligibility of studies identified was done independently by two reviewers. Study quality assessment was based on a priori defined criteria. Due to methodological limitations in most of the studies included and due to substantial qualitative differences in the study design, conduct, and reporting, quantitative meta-analysis was not indicated. However, as highlighted above, the qualitative results are consistent despite the heterogeneity of the studies included so that we consider the conclusions drawn to be robust and generalizable.
Implications for clinical practice and future research
After hip replacement with contemporary MoM bearings the release of metal ions is highest in stemmed implants with large heads followed by resurfacing devices and also – but on a lower level – small heads. As the deposition of metal products may not only lead to local but possibly also systemic adverse health outcomes, the conclusions of this review have high relevance not only for orthopaedic surgeons, but also for other medical disciplines.
Due to the risk of systemic accumulation of metal ions following implantation of hip replacements with MoM bearing, consideration on risks and benefits should be done carefully and individually for every patient prior to surgery.
The authors support a „time out“ of stemmed large-head MoM-THA and recommend a restricted indication for hip resurfacing arthroplasty to patients without risk factors such as small implant size, female gender, and renal insufficiency [5], [79]. Patients with status post implantation of MoM should be followed by standardized monitoring. Especially examined ions, medium and analysis technique should be standardized to allow comparability of results and further analysis. Close interdisciplinary cooperation is necessary in case of potential systemic reactions due to increased metal ion concentrations.
An approach to this unresolved difficulty was one of the main objectives of an international and interdisciplinary expert conference, which took place in our institution. In April 2012, we hosted an international multi-disciplinary expert conference endorsed by the “European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology” (EFORT), “European Hip Society” (EHS), and the “German Osteoarthritis Society” in order to provide clinically-relevant advice on how to treat and monitor current and future patients with MoM THR. Beside orthopaedic surgeons being experienced with MoM hip endoprosthetics, epidemiologists, toxicologists, biomechanics, and pathologists as well as a patients representative and regulatory agency representative from 7 European countries and the US participated.
The statement resulting from this consensus initiative is published in detail on web sites of European [30] and German [84], [85] orthopaedic societies [86]. Beside detailed recommendations on monitoring of MoM hip replacements and metal ion measurement the statement also summarizes prioritized questions for future research. One research issue that needs to be prioritized is the investigation of potential systemic risks due to accumulation of metal ions.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank CB Rieker, J Kunze, G Dinnebier, and H Huberti for their substantial and professional endorsement during the realization of this review.
Author Contributions
Analyzed the data: AH FH JL AS HD KPG JS. Wrote the paper: AH FH JL AS HD KPG JS.
References
- 1. Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C (2007) The operation of the century: Total hip replacement. Lancet 370: 1508–1519.
- 2. Brockett C, Williams S, Jin Z, Isaac G, Fisher J (2007) Friction of total hip replacements with different bearings and loading conditions. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 81: 508–515.
- 3. Ishida T, Clarke IC, Donaldson TK, Shirasu H, Shishido T, et al. (2009) Comparing ceramic-metal to metal-metal total hip replacements--a simulator study of metal wear and ion release in 32- and 38-mm bearings. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 91: 887–896.
- 4. Yan Y, Neville A, Dowson D, Williams S, Fisher J (2009) Effect of metallic nanoparticles on the biotribocorrosion behaviour of Metal-on-Metal hip prostheses. Wear 267: 683–688.
- 5. Kwon YM, Ostlere SJ, McLardy-Smith P, Athanasou NA, Gill HS, et al. (2011) “Asymptomatic” pseudotumors after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Prevalence and metal ion study. J Arthroplasty 26: 511–518.
- 6. Langton DJ, Joyce TJ, Jameson SS, Lord J, van Orsouw M, et al. (2011a) Adverse reaction to metal debris following hip resurfacing: The influence of component type, orientation and volumetric wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93-B: 164–171.
- 7. Langton DJ, Joyce TJ, Mangat N, Lord J, van Orsouw M, et al. (2011b) Reducing metal ion release following hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am 42: 169–180.
- 8. van der Straeten C, Grammatopoulos G, Gill HS, Calistri A, Campbell P, et al. (2012) The 2012 Otto Aufranc Award: The Interpretation of Metal Ion Levels in Unilateral and Bilateral Hip Resurfacing. Clin Orthop Rel Res 471: 377–385.
- 9.
Bartens W (2012) Hüftprothesen in der Kritik. Giftige Gelenke. Available: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/gesundheit/2.220/gefaehrliche-hueftprothesen-giftige-gelenke-1.1297192. Accessed 2012 Mar 5.
- 10.
Cohen D (2012) How safe are metal-on-metal implants? BMJ 344.
- 11.
Godlee F (2012) Serious risks from metal-on-metal hip implants. BMJ 344.
- 12.
Heneghan C, Langton D, Thompson M (2012) Ongoing problems with metal-on-metal hip implants. BMJ 344.
- 13. Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Hallab NJ, Natu S, et al. (2010) Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A consequence of excess wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92-B: 38–46.
- 14.
Torjesen I (2012) Lifelong checks are needed for patients fitted with dangerous hip implants. BMJ 344.
- 15.
Australian Orthopaedic Association (2011) National Joint Replacement Registry. Demographics of Hip Arthroplasty. Supplementary Report.
- 16.
Australian Orthopaedic Association (2011) National Joint Replacement Registry. Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. Annual Report.
- 17.
National Joint Registry (2011) National Joint Registry for England and Wales. 8th Annual Report. Surgical data to 31st December 2010.
- 18. Hart AJ, Sabah SA, Bandi AS, Maggiore P, Tarassoli P, et al. (2011a) Sensitivity and specificity of blood cobalt and chromium metal ions for predicting failure of MoM hip replacement. JBJS Br 93-B: 1308–1313.
- 19. Kwon YM, Thomas P, Summer B, Pandit H, Taylor A, et al. (2010) Lymphocyte proliferation responses in patients with pseudotumors following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 28: 444–450.
- 20. Matthies AK, Skinner JA, Osmani H, Henckel J, Hart AJ (2011b) Pseudotumors are common in well-positioned low-wearing metal-on-metal hips. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470: 1895–1906.
- 21. Machado C, Appelbe A, Wood R (2012) Arthroprosthetic cobaltism and cardiomyopathy. Heart Lung Circ 21: 759–760.
- 22. Oldenburg M, Wegner R, Baur X (2009) Severe cobalt intoxication due to prosthesis wear in repeated total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 24: 825.
- 23. Linna A, Oksa P, Groundstroem K, Halkosaari M, Palmroos P, et al. (2004) Exposure to cobalt in the production of cobalt and cobalt compounds and its effect on the heart. Occup Environ Med 61: 877–885.
- 24.
Schiele R, editor (2011) BK 1103: Erkrankungen durch Chrom oder seine Verbindungen. 3 ed. Stuttgart: Gentner Verlag.
- 25.
Seidler A, Jähnichen S, Hegewald J, Fishta A, Krug O, et al.. (2012) Systematic review and quantification of respiratory cancre risk for occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium. Int Arch Occup Environ Health: 19 Oct 2012 [Epub ahead of print].
- 26. Zahiri CA, Schmalzried T, Szuszczewicz ES, Amstutz HC (1998) Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 13: 890–895.
- 27.
CASP (2011) Critical Appraisal Skills Programme – Appraising the Evidence. Available: http://www.casp-uk.net/find-appraise-act/appraising-the-evidence/. Accessed 2012 Jun 28.
- 28.
SIGN (2011) Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network – Methodology Checklists. Available: http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/checklists.html. Accessed 2012 Jun 28.
- 29.
Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, et al.. (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343.
- 30.
EFORT (2012) Consensus statement “Current Evidence on the Management of Metal-on-Metal Bearings”.
- 31.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group TP (2009) Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6.
- 32. Brodner W, Bitzan P, Meisinger V, Kaider A, Gottsauner-Wolf F, et al. (1997) Elevated serum cobalt with metal-on-metal articulating surfaces. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79-B: 316–321.
- 33. Brodner W, Bitzan P, Meisinger V, Kaider A, Gottsauner-Wolf F, et al. (2003) Serum cobalt levels after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A: 2168–2173.
- 34. Dahlstrand H, Stark A, Anissian L, Hailer NP (2009) Elevated serum concentrations of cobalt, chromium, nickel, and manganese after metal-on-metal alloarthroplasty of the hip: A prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 24: 837–845.
- 35. Engh CA Jr, MacDonald SJ, Sritulanondha S, Thompson A, Naudie D, et al. (2009) 2008 John Charnley award: Metal ion levels after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: A randomized trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467: 101–111.
- 36. Hailer NP, Blaheta RA, Dahlstrand H, Stark A (2011) Elevation of circulating HLA DR(+) CD8(+) T-cells and correlation with chromium and cobalt concentrations 6 years after metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. A randomized trial. Acta Orthop 82: 6–12.
- 37.
MacDonald SJ, McCalden RW, Chess DG, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, et al.. (2003) Metal-on-metal versus polyethylene in hip arthroplasty: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res: 282–296.
- 38. Zijlstra WP, Cheung J, Sietsma MS, van Raay JJAM, Deutman R (2009) No superiority of cemented metal-on-metal vs. metal-on-polyethylene THA at 5-year follow-up. Orthopedics 32: 479–485.
- 39.
Zijlstra WP, van Raay JJAM, Bulstra SK, Deutman R (2010) No superiority of cemented metal-on-metal over metal-on-polyethylene THA in a randomized controlled trial at 10-year follow-up. Orthopedics: 154–161.
- 40. Grübl A, Weissinger M, Brodner W, Gleiss A, Giurea A, et al. (2006) Serum aluminium and cobalt levels after ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88-B: 1003–1005.
- 41. Weissinger M, Grübl A, Poell G (2011) Serum-cobalt levels with MoM bearings in the cement-free total hip arthroplasty results covering two years; prospective study. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 78: 410–415.
- 42. Smolders JMH, Hol A, Rijnberg WJ, van Susante JLC (2011b) Metal ion levels and functional results after either resurfacing hip arthroplasty or conventional metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. Short- term outcome of a randomized controlled trial. Acta Orthop 82: 559–566.
- 43. Vendittoli PA, Mottard S, Roy AG, Dupont C, Lavigne M (2007) Chromium and cobalt ion release following the Durom high carbon content, forged metal-on-metal surface replacement of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89-B: 441–448.
- 44. Vendittoli PA, Roy A, Mottard S, Girard J, Lusignan D, et al. (2010) Metal ion release from bearing wear and corrosion with 28 mm and large-diameter metal-on-metal bearing articulations: A follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92-B: 12–19.
- 45. Clarke MT, Lee PTH, Arora A, Villar RN (2003) Levels of metal ions after small- and large-diameter metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85-B: 913–917.
- 46. Witzleb WC, Ziegler J, Krummenauer F, Neumeister V, Guenther KP (2006) Exposure to chromium, cobalt and molybdenum from metal-on-metal total hip replacement and hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 77: 697–705.
- 47. Allan DG, Trammell R, Dyrstad B, Barnhart B, Milbrandt JC (2007) Serum cobalt and chromium elevations following hip resurfacing with the Cormet 2000 device. J Surg Orthop Adv 16: 12–18.
- 48. Beaule PE, Kim PR, Hamdi A, Fazekas A (2011) A prospective metal ion study of large-head metal-on-metal bearing: a matched-pair analysis of hip resurfacing versus total hip replacement. Orthop Clin N Am 42: 251–257.
- 49. Garbuz DS, Tanzer M, Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Duncan CP (2010) The John Charnley Award: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing versus large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468: 318–325.
- 50. Smolders JMH, Bisseling P, Hol A, van der Straeten C, Schreurs BW, et al. (2011a) Metal ion interpretation in resurfacing vs. conventional hip arthroplasty and in whole blood vs. serum. How should we interpret metal ion data? Hip Int 21: 587–595.
- 51. Imanishi T, Hasegawa M, Sudo A (2010) Serum metal ion levels after second-generation metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130: 1447–1450.
- 52. Hallows RK, Pelt CE, Erickson JA, Peters CL (2011) Serum metal ion concentration: Comparison between small and large head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26: 1176–1181.
- 53.
Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Gandhi JN, Sidaginamale R, et al.. (2011c) Accelerating failure rate of the ASR total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93 B: 1011–1016.
- 54. Pelt CE, Bergeson AG, Anderson LA, Stoddard GJ, Peters CL (2011) Serum metal ion concentrations after unilateral vs bilateral large-head metal-on-metal primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 26: 1494–1500.
- 55. Williams DH, Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS (2011) Prevalence of pseudotumor in asymptomatic patients after metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93: 2164–2171.
- 56. Bisseling P, Zeilstra DJ, Hol AM, van Susante JL (2011) Metal ion levels in patients with a lumbar metal-on-metal total disc replacement. Should we be concerned? J Bone Joint Surg Br 93-B: 949–954.
- 57. Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Webb J, Nargol AVF (2008) The effect of component size and orientation on the concentrations of metal ions after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90-B: 1143–1151.
- 58. Langton DJ, Sprowson AP, Joyce TJ, Reed M, Carluke I, et al. (2009) Blood metal ion concentrations after hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A comparative study of articular surface replacement and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91-B: 1287–1295.
- 59. Moroni A, Savarino L, Cadossi M, Baldini N, Giannini S (2008) Does ion release differ between hip resurfacing and metal-on-metal THA? Clin Orthop Relat Res 466: 700–707.
- 60. Moroni A, Savarino L, Hoque M, Cadossi M, Baldini N (2011) Do ion levels in hip resurfacing differ from metal-on-metal THA at midterm? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469: 180–187.
- 61. Grübl A, Marker M, Brodner W, Giurea A, Heinze G, et al. (2007) Long-term follow-up of metal-on-metal total hip replacement. J Orthop Res 25: 841–848.
- 62. Marker M, Gruebl A, Riedl O, Heinze G, Pohanka E, et al. (2008) Metal-on-metal hip implants: Do they impair renal function in the long-term? A 10-year follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128: 915–919.
- 63. Milosev I, Pisot V, Campbell P (2005) Serum levels of cobalt and chromium in patients with Sikomet metal-metal total hip replacements. J Orthop Res 23: 526–535.
- 64. Rasquinha VJ, Ranawat CS, Weiskopf J, Rodriguez JA, Skipor AK, et al. (2006) Serum metal levels and bearing surfaces in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 21: 47–52.
- 65. Savarino L, Granchi D, Ciapetti G, Cenni E, Greco M, et al. (2003) Ion release in stable hip arthroplasties using metal-on-metal articulating surfaces: A comparison between short- and medium-term results. J Biomed Mater Res A 66: 450–456.
- 66. Savarino L, Granchi D, Ciapetti G, Cenni E, Nardi Pantoli A, et al. (2002) Ion release in patients with metal-on-metal hip bearings in total joint replacement: A comparison with metal-on-polyethylene bearings. J Biomed Mater Res 63: 467–474.
- 67. Savarino L, Greco M, Cenni E, Cavasinni L, Rotini R, et al. (2006) Differences in ion release after ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal total hip replacement. Medium-term follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88: 472–476.
- 68. Bolland BJRF, Culliford DJ, Langton DJ, Millington JPS, Arden NK, et al. (2011) High failure rates with a large-diameter hybrid metal-on-metal total hip replacement. Clinical, radiological and retrieval analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93-B: 608–615.
- 69. De Smet K, De Haan R, Calistri A, Campbell PA, Ebramzadeh E, et al. (2008) Metal ion measurement as a diagnostic tool to identify problems with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90-A Suppl 4 202-8 202–208.
- 70. Corradi M, Daniel J, Ziaee H, Alinovi R, Mutti A, et al. (2011) Early markers of nephrotoxicity in patients with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469: 1651–1659.
- 71. Daniel J, Ziaee H, Pradhan C, Pynsent PB, McMinn DJW (2010) Renal clearance of cobalt in relation to the use of metal-on-metal bearings in hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92-A: 840–845.
- 72. Yang J, Shen B, Zhou Z, Pei F, Kang P (2011) Changes in cobalt and chromium levels after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in young, active Chinese patients. J Arthroplasty 26: 65–70.
- 73. Malek IA, King A, Sharma H, Malek S, Jones S, et al. (2012) The sensitivity, specifity and predicitive values of raised plasma metal ion levels in the diagnosis of adverse reaction to metal debris in symptomatic patients with a metal-on-metal arthroplasty of the hip. JBJS Br 94-B: 1045–1050.
- 74. Delaunay CP, Bonnomet F, Clavert P, Laffargue P, Migaud H (2008) THA using metal-on-metal articulation in active patients younger than 50 years. Clin Orthop Rel Res 466: 340–346.
- 75. Eswaramoorthy V, Moonot P, Kalairajah Y, Biant LC, Field RE (2008) The Metasul metal-on-metal articulation in primary total hip replacement. Clinical and radiological results at ten years. JBJS Br 90-B: 1278–1283.
- 76. Streit MR, Schröder K, Korber M, Merle C, Gotterbarm T, et al. (2012) High survival in young patients using a second generation uncemented total hip replacement. Int Orthop 36: 1129–1136.
- 77. Zenz P, Stiehl JB, Knechtel H, Titzer-Hochmaier G, Schwagerl W (2009) Ten year follow-up of the non-porous Allofit cementless acetabular component. JBJS Br 91-B: 1443–1447.
- 78. Lavigne M, Belzile EL, Roy A, Morin F, Amzica T, et al. (2011) Comparison of whole-blood metal ion levels in four types of metal-on-metal large-diameter femoral head total hip arthroplasty: The potential influence of the adapter sleeve. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93-A: 128–136.
- 79. Smith AJ, Dieppe P, Vernon K, Porter M, Blom AW (2012) Failure rates of stemmed metal-on-metal hip replacements: Analysis of data from the National Joint Registry of England and Wales. Lancet 379: 1199–1204.
- 80.
Mäkelä KT, Visuri T, Pulkkinen P, Eskelinen A, Remes V, et al.. (2012) Risk of cancer with metal-on-metal hip replacements: Population based study. BMJ 345.
- 81. Visuri T, Borg H, Pulkkinen P, Paavolainen P, Pukkala E (2010) A retrospective comparative study of mortality and causes of death among patients with metal-on-metal and metal-on-polyethylene total hip prostheses in primary osteoarthritis after a long-term follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11: 78.
- 82. Visuri T, Pukkala E, Pulkkinen P, Paavolainen P (2003) Decreased cancer risk in patients who have been operated on with total hip and knee arthroplasty for primary osteoarthrosis. A meta-analysis of 6 Nordic cohorts with 73,000 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 74: 351–360.
- 83. Moulin JJ, Wild P, Romazini S, Lasfargues G, Peltier A, et al. (1998) Lung cancer risk in hard-metal workers. Am J Epidemiol 148: 241–248.
- 84.
Arbeitsgemeinschaft Endoprothetik (2012) Konsensus-Empfehlungen zur Handhabung von Metall-Metall-Gleitpaarungen. Available: http://www.ae-germany.com/index.php?option=com_phocadownload&view=category&id=13&Itemid=380. Accessed 2012 Nov 11.
- 85.
DGOOC (2012) Metall-Metall-Gleitpaarungen. Aktuelle Konsensus-Empfehlungen. Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie – Mitteilungen und Nachrichten. Available: http://www.dgooc.de/images/stories/Presse/Pressemitteilung/Metall_Metall_Paarungen_OUMN_3_2012.pdf. Accessed 2012 Jul 2.
- 86. Hannemann F, Hartmann A, Schmitt J, Lützner J, Seidler A, et al. (2013) European multidisciplinary consensus statement on the use and monitoring of metal-on-metal bearings for total hip replacement and hip resurfacing. Orthop Trauma Surg Res 99: 263–271.