LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Large Joints and Extremities/MoM Hips: Unexplained Pain Probably Tissue Damage
Large Joints and Extremities

MoM Hips: Unexplained Pain Probably Tissue Damage

April 8, 2013 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

MoM Hips: Unexplained Pain Probably Tissue Damage
Hip Pain / Source: Wikimedia Commons and Protohiro
Secondary

Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) researchers have revealed the results of their new study showing that the cause of unexplained pain among metal-on-metal hip implant patients is more likely to be tissue damage than wear of the implant. The study was performed by Dr. Danyal Nawabi, an orthopedic surgery fellow, along with research collaborators from HSS.

The research group, which did not have any ties to hip implant manufacturers, was led by Douglas Padgett, M.D., chief of the Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Division and chief of the Hip Service at HSS, and Hollis Potter, M.D., chief of the Division of Magnetic Resonance imaging (MRI). They compared 50 patients who came to HSS for revision surgery because of unexplained pain, to a control group of 48 patients who came to HSS for revision surgery because of loosening, malalignment, infection or fracture.

The investigators combined results from clinical examinations, MRIs, wear analysis studies on the removed implants, and pathology studies, including the degree of aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis-associated lesions (ALVAL), a sign of adverse tissue reactions to metal debris.

Thirty patients with unexplained pain (60% of the group) had an ALVAL score of at least 5 on a 10-point scale, indicating moderate to high adverse tissue reactions; 12% of patients had some buildup of metal deposits in their soft tissue. The average synovial thickness was three times higher in the unexplained pain group compared to the control group, and the average synovial fluid volume was five times higher in the unexplained pain group compared to the control group. Ten times as many patients in the unexplained pain group had high-grade tissue damage scores compared to the control group. Researchers found no differences between the unexplained pain group and the control group in terms of age, sex, body mass index, length of implantation, or size or positioning of the implants. Implants in both groups showed similar signs of wear.

“We found that some patients had a significant amount of tissue damage but not a lot of wear, ” Dr. Wright said, “suggesting that factors other than wear are contributing to the problem regardless of whether the patients have pain. We have used the information from our study to develop guidelines for patients and surgeons.”

Asked what work remains to be done and how it should be approached, Dr. Padgett told OTW, “The real underlying question that remains is as follows: Are there unique patient characteristics that make some more susceptible to this reaction as opposed to many others who seem to have no problem with metal-on-metal bearings? Our research group is pursuing this line of investigation by looking at possible genetic factors. This work is made possible through our tissue registry at HSS. This is an exciting next step in understanding patients’ response to prosthetic implants.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy