Re: ceramic vs metal ???? What are the pros & cons?

[Guest guest]

Hi

I think you should investigate resurfacing, this is Metal-on-Metal and designed

for people

who want to be fairly active post op, it also means that if it does eventually

fail you will be

able to have a thr as if it was your first, without normal revision surgery.

Look at this x-ray it shows the difference between the two procedures.

http://www.thehipclinic.co.uk/gallery/BHRoneside.JPG

You must speak to a dr. who is experienced in modern resurfacing (as well as

Thr) - I can

help you find a good surgeon who would give a free email consultation of your

x-rays to

let you know if you would be a candidate for resurfacing.

If it were a choice for me between ceramic thr and M-o-M thr (Ihave had both

hips

resurfaced when I was 37) I would most definately go for the Large femoral head

M-o-M

simply because there is less risk of dislocation. There is no evidence that

metal ions cause

problems and the history of Metal-on-Metal goes back over 35 years, ceramics

have a

shorter history than even resurfacings and of course did have a lot of problems

with

shattering. I must emphasise that the breakage problems of ceramics does seem to

have

been rectified in recent years and does seem to be an excellent option, what I

am saying is

that for me M-o-M would be my choice.

Best Wishes with your choice

jane in Wales

[Guest guest]

---

Hi Jane in Wales,

Thank you very much for your response. Sadly, I am not a candidate

for hip resurfacing. I am 56, and I would very much like to return a

an active lifestyle. The surgeon said he recommended the ceramic on

ceramic implant because of my age. I must say that after reading the

multitude of entries about THR, I am now feeling quite scared and

fearful of the operation and post op.

In general, I have more questions than answers. I would like to hear

from anyone who has had either the metal on metal or the Stryker

ceramic on ceramic implant. This would be MOST appreciated.

Also, I live in Tucson, AZ; does anyone have any recommendations for

orthopedic surgeons?

Francesca

In Joint Replacement , " laeticiajane "

<laeticia_demorte@...> wrote:

>

> Hi

>

> I think you should investigate resurfacing, this is Metal-on-Metal

and designed for people

> who want to be fairly active post op, it also means that if it does

eventually fail you will be

> able to have a thr as if it was your first, without normal revision

surgery.

>

> Look at this x-ray it shows the difference between the two

procedures.

>

> http://www.thehipclinic.co.uk/gallery/BHRoneside.JPG

>

> You must speak to a dr. who is experienced in modern resurfacing

(as well as Thr) - I can

> help you find a good surgeon who would give a free email

consultation of your x-rays to

> let you know if you would be a candidate for resurfacing.

>

> If it were a choice for me between ceramic thr and M-o-M thr (Ihave

had both hips

> resurfaced when I was 37) I would most definately go for the Large

femoral head M-o-M

> simply because there is less risk of dislocation. There is no

evidence that metal ions cause

> problems and the history of Metal-on-Metal goes back over 35 years,

ceramics have a

> shorter history than even resurfacings and of course did have a lot

of problems with

> shattering. I must emphasise that the breakage problems of ceramics

does seem to have

> been rectified in recent years and does seem to be an excellent

option, what I am saying is

> that for me M-o-M would be my choice.

>

> Best Wishes with your choice

> jane in Wales

>

[Guest guest]

After doing 3 years of research, I decided on a Stryker Cobalt & Chromium

implant with a

big ball. I have a '34' ball.

Once I had made my decision, I had to find the surgeon that dealt with not on

that

Company, but believed in the large ball and used the cobalt/chromium implant.

After

meeting with 3 surgeons, I found my man.

I had my hip done on August 7 of this year. I am not doing too well because my

other hip

is as bad as the one I had replaced. That will change when I have that hip done

in January.

No one was more fearful than I. As I say, it took me 3 years to make a decision

after

suffering in pain for 6 years.

I had a pain pump after my surgery but never used it.

My new hip is just great. No pain.

Arianne

> >

> > Hi

> >

> > I think you should investigate resurfacing, this is Metal-on-Metal

> and designed for people

> > who want to be fairly active post op, it also means that if it does

> eventually fail you will be

> > able to have a thr as if it was your first, without normal revision

> surgery.

> >

> > Look at this x-ray it shows the difference between the two

> procedures.

> >

> > http://www.thehipclinic.co.uk/gallery/BHRoneside.JPG

> >

> > You must speak to a dr. who is experienced in modern resurfacing

> (as well as Thr) - I can

> > help you find a good surgeon who would give a free email

> consultation of your x-rays to

> > let you know if you would be a candidate for resurfacing.

> >

> > If it were a choice for me between ceramic thr and M-o-M thr (Ihave

> had both hips

> > resurfaced when I was 37) I would most definately go for the Large

> femoral head M-o-M

> > simply because there is less risk of dislocation. There is no

> evidence that metal ions cause

> > problems and the history of Metal-on-Metal goes back over 35 years,

> ceramics have a

> > shorter history than even resurfacings and of course did have a lot

> of problems with

> > shattering. I must emphasise that the breakage problems of ceramics

> does seem to have

> > been rectified in recent years and does seem to be an excellent

> option, what I am saying is

> > that for me M-o-M would be my choice.

> >

> > Best Wishes with your choice

> > jane in Wales

> >

>