Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings.

We report 17 patients (20 hips) in whom metal-on-metal resurfacing had been performed and who presented with various symptoms and a soft-tissue mass which we termed a pseudotumour. Each patient underwent plain radiography and in some, CT, MRI and ultrasonography were also performed. In addition, histological examination of available samples was undertaken. All the patients were women and their presentation was variable. The most common symptom was discomfort in the region of the hip. Other symptoms included spontaneous dislocation, nerve palsy, a noticeable mass or a rash. The common histological features were extensive necrosis and lymphocytic infiltration. To date, 13 of the 20 hips have required revision to a conventional hip replacement. Two are awaiting revision. We estimate that approximately 1% of patients who have a metal-on-metal resurfacing develop a pseudotumour within five years. The cause is unknown and is probably multifactorial. There may be a toxic reaction to an excess of particulate metal wear debris or a hypersensitivity reaction to a normal amount of metal debris. We are concerned that with time the incidence of these pseudotumours may increase. Further investigation is required to define their cause.

[1]  J. Brostoff,et al.  Metal sensitivity in patients with joint replacement arthroplasties. , 1975, British medical journal.

[2]  K. De Coninck,et al.  Allergic contact granuloma due to palladium following ear piercing , 2006, Contact dermatitis.

[3]  Zhongmin Jin,et al.  PRESIDENTIAL GUEST LECTURE: Tribology of Alternative Bearings , 2006, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[4]  C. Lohmann,et al.  Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[5]  R. L. Jowett,et al.  Recurrent intrapelvic cyst complicating metal-on-metal cemented total hip arthroplasty , 2000, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[6]  D. Back,et al.  Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[7]  B. Morrey Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings , 2009 .

[8]  J. Rodrigo,et al.  Immune Response to Synthetic Materials: Sensitization of Patients Receiving Orthopaedic Implants , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  N. Pratt,et al.  Lower prosthesis-specific 10-year revision rate with crosslinked than with non-crosslinked polyethylene in primary total knee arthroplasty , 2015, Acta Orthopaedica.

[10]  J. Hunt,et al.  Host inflammatory response to NiCr, CoCr, and Ti in a soft tissue implantation model. , 2006, Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A.

[11]  F. Middleton,et al.  A benign psoas mass following metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[12]  N. Hunzelmann,et al.  Sarcoidal-type allergic contact granuloma: a rare complication of ear piercing. , 2004, The American Journal of dermatopathology.

[13]  N. Athanasou,et al.  An assessment of the histological criteria used to diagnose infection in hip revision arthroplasty tissues. , 1999, Journal of clinical pathology.

[14]  S. Trattnig,et al.  Cystic lesion of the groin due to metallosis: a rare long-term complication of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. , 2007, The Journal of arthroplasty.