Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

[Guest guest]

Thats pretty much the information I researched also. I was told the the BHR

device and the Corin device were designed/invented by the same person. One

of the sites claims that the design has been improved to allow for precision

alignment which eliminates the early on thunking and grating a lot of us

enjoy. Weather or not thats true???? I tend to be a skeptic,sorry I'm

trying to do better. Mr. Batts with CorinUSA has been a great source of

information for me.

Sheff

..

[Guest guest]

At 09:58 PM 6/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:

> thank you for your answer. To your knowledge what is the technical

>difference in-between Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus. Tom dV.

Tom,

Probably the biggest difference is in the acetabular component. The

coatings where the acetabular bone stock is to grow into are different. I

didn't pay much attention, as when I had mine done a year ago, the Conserve

Plus was the only one being done in this country (US), and I wouldn't be

able to afford to travel to England even if I felt their's was better. I

think the differences between the C+ and C2K are so minor as to be

inconsequential, where the differences between resurfacing and THR are like

night and day.

(celebrated my second hip's first anniversary by pulling weeds at a

neighborhood weeding party-lol)

[Guest guest]

At 09:58 PM 6/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:

> To your knowledge what is the technical

>difference in-between Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus.

Check out their various web-sites (I think the BHR and Cormet 2000 are the

same device). I didn't bother studying the differences too much, as I

didn't really have a choice. I think after deciding that resurfacing is

the way to go, and having an idea whether or not your insurance will pay

for it, you need to decide which surgeon you feel comfortable with, and how

close you want to or can stay to home, etc. I was blessed in that my

insurance paid for both hips, Dr. Boyd is an outstanding surgeon who did

for me what very few others would have attempted, and he is within an hour

of my home!

[Guest guest]

Cormet 2000 (C2K) and BHR are NOT the same device. They are manufactured by

different companies using different casting techniques.

Yes, Mr. McMinn (the Birmingham inventor of these devices) and his team

first worked with Corin to manufacture the first prototypes starting about

ten years ago... back then resurfacing was known as the McMinn hip. The

device went through a number of prototypes and trials. But in 1996 (?) there

was a dispute between the Birmingham doctors (McMinn/Treacy & co) and Corin

supposedly over the casting process that Corin was using. I really don't

know the real reason.

In any case, there was what seems to be an acremonious parting of ways - the

reasons vary depending on who tells the story but McMinn/Treacy were no

longer happy with Corin. The Birmingham crew continued to develop the device

(especially the actetabular cup which is cast in a different way then Corin -

Porocast vs sintered) under the banner of Midland Medical Technologies (MMT).

The new Birmingham device incorporated McMinn's later improvements became

known as the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing device (BHR).

Corin later introduced the Corin 2000 based on the earlier McMinn device but

with Corin's own modifications. McMinn remains critical of their process but

he also has a rival product - it is difficult to say if the practicle

difference is substantive... likely that both work just fine and that they

are only arguing about details that won't impact the success of either one.

Hard to say.

Hence the C2K and the BHR are two different devices. The main differences is

in the chosen casting technology in particular how the beads that the bone

grow into on the acetabular are attached. In a BHR they are cast integral

with the cup which required higher precision in the casting phase but no

further meterlugic treatment afterwards. With C2K, I understand that the

beads are added later through a sintering process that requires the metals to

be heated again.

If you search the archive we have many old postings on this subject. If you

get the BHR video from McMinn you will have his unsolicited opinion on the

matter.

C

BHR 4 May 2002

> Subj:Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

> Date:30/06/2002 06:26:16 GMT Daylight Time

> From:<A HREF= " mailto:shefster@... " >shefster@...</A>

> Reply-to:<A

HREF= " mailto:surfacehippy " >surfacehippy </A>

> To:<A

HREF= " mailto:surfacehippy " >surfacehippy </A>

> Sent from the Internet

>

>

>

>

> Thats pretty much the information I researched also. I was told the the

> BHR

> device and the Corin device were designed/invented by the same person. One

>

> of the sites claims that the design has been improved to allow for

> precision

> alignment which eliminates the early on thunking and grating a lot of us

> enjoy. Weather or not thats true???? I tend to be a skeptic,sorry I'm

> trying to do better. Mr. Batts with CorinUSA has been a great source

> of

> information for me.

> Sheff

> .

[Guest guest]

Couldn't agree more; it appears they all have good and poor qualities and all

improve function but have some limitations. At least the one I have is

certainly making a definite improvement in my ability to function and I had

limitations before I had hip problems so now I learn the new parameters. Its

still a vast improvement. Its also pretty obvious one has to be veeery

careful with the phraseology around here. Isn't rose silk a shade of red?

Sheff

[Guest guest]

With all due respect I would like to point out that the UK price for hip

resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If you want the top surgeons then like

anywhere in the world they cost a little bit more. Because Resurfacing has been

done for many years over here there are a lot of experienced surgeons who work

in the private sector (i.e. insurance job or paying patient). The cost is 1/3rd

to 1/2 of what it is in the US.

Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

At 09:58 PM 6/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:

> thank you for your answer. To your knowledge what is the technical

>difference in-between Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus. Tom dV.

Tom,

Probably the biggest difference is in the acetabular component. The

coatings where the acetabular bone stock is to grow into are different. I

didn't pay much attention, as when I had mine done a year ago, the Conserve

Plus was the only one being done in this country (US), and I wouldn't be

able to afford to travel to England even if I felt their's was better. I

think the differences between the C+ and C2K are so minor as to be

inconsequential, where the differences between resurfacing and THR are like

night and day.

(celebrated my second hip's first anniversary by pulling weeds at a

neighborhood weeding party-lol)

[Guest guest]

At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

>

>With all due respect I would like to point out that the UK price for hip

>resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If you want the top surgeons then

>like anywhere in the world they cost a little bit more. Because

>Resurfacing has been done for many years over here there are a lot of

>experienced surgeons who work in the private sector (i.e. insurance job or

>paying patient).

,

I'm not knocking either the devices or the surgeons. I was pointing out

that in MY situation, I would not have been able to afford to travel to

England, and I don't think we were aware of the Belgium option at the

time. The only choice I had was to have the C+ done here in the states, or

go to England for the BHR (which as I said would have been nearly

impossible), so I didn't bother to research the differences between the two

devices. At this time, I would be perfectly happy with any one of the

three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the surgeons are good, or they wouldn't

be participating in the trials or have so many people traveling such

distances to get to them.

I certainly NEVER intend to get into the debate of " ours " vs. " yours " or

NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them are perfect and we are all

seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really ugly of each of them.

[Guest guest]

The BHR and Cormet 2000 are totally different devices each with their own

patents and are made by rival companies. The reason they are chosen by some,

as Saeed pointed out, is that certain muscle doesn't have to be cut to fit them

and therefore recuperation time is a lot quicker.

Rog

Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

At 09:58 PM 6/29/2002 -0400, you wrote:

> To your knowledge what is the technical

>difference in-between Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus.

Check out their various web-sites (I think the BHR and Cormet 2000 are the

same device). I didn't bother studying the differences too much, as I

didn't really have a choice. I think after deciding that resurfacing is

the way to go, and having an idea whether or not your insurance will pay

for it, you need to decide which surgeon you feel comfortable with, and how

close you want to or can stay to home, etc. I was blessed in that my

insurance paid for both hips, Dr. Boyd is an outstanding surgeon who did

for me what very few others would have attempted, and he is within an hour

of my home!

[Guest guest]

Hi

I didn't take it that way but people joining the site recently may have

misunderstood you and thought the cost in the UK was high. I just wanted to

point out it was cheaper here than the US. Incidently I have see whispers in

our press that in India (in American Hospitals) they are doing BHR operations

for 10,000 US Dollars and less. These are totally private sector hospitals.

I am sorry if you thought I was having a go. I wasn't. Sometimes you type out an

e-mail and it can be read in different ways. I was just making the point for

people who haven't got insurance cover that they can save a great deal of money.

Rog

Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

>

>With all due respect I would like to point out that the UK price for hip

>resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If you want the top surgeons then

>like anywhere in the world they cost a little bit more. Because

>Resurfacing has been done for many years over here there are a lot of

>experienced surgeons who work in the private sector (i.e. insurance job or

>paying patient).

,

I'm not knocking either the devices or the surgeons. I was pointing out

that in MY situation, I would not have been able to afford to travel to

England, and I don't think we were aware of the Belgium option at the

time. The only choice I had was to have the C+ done here in the states, or

go to England for the BHR (which as I said would have been nearly

impossible), so I didn't bother to research the differences between the two

devices. At this time, I would be perfectly happy with any one of the

three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the surgeons are good, or they wouldn't

be participating in the trials or have so many people traveling such

distances to get to them.

I certainly NEVER intend to get into the debate of " ours " vs. " yours " or

NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them are perfect and we are all

seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really ugly of each of them.

[Guest guest]

i do not know if anybody in this group is aware that

BHR is done in India too.The surgeon here is perhaps

the only one in the Whole of Asia who does a BHR.He

has been trained by Mr.. I am a BHR candidate

waiting to undergo the surgery by end july.

Ravi

--- roger frost wrote:

> Hi

> I didn't take it that way but people joining the

> site recently may have misunderstood you and thought

> the cost in the UK was high. I just wanted to point

> out it was cheaper here than the US. Incidently I

> have see whispers in our press that in India (in

> American Hospitals) they are doing BHR operations

> for 10,000 US Dollars and less. These are totally

> private sector hospitals.

> I am sorry if you thought I was having a go. I

> wasn't. Sometimes you type out an e-mail and it can

> be read in different ways. I was just making the

> point for people who haven't got insurance cover

> that they can save a great deal of money.

> Rog

> Re: Cormet 2000 and

> Conserve plus

>

>

> At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

> >

> >With all due respect I would like to point out

> that the UK price for hip

> >resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If you

> want the top surgeons then

> >like anywhere in the world they cost a little bit

> more. Because

> >Resurfacing has been done for many years over

> here there are a lot of

> >experienced surgeons who work in the private

> sector (i.e. insurance job or

> >paying patient).

>

> ,

>

> I'm not knocking either the devices or the

> surgeons. I was pointing out

> that in MY situation, I would not have been able

> to afford to travel to

> England, and I don't think we were aware of the

> Belgium option at the

> time. The only choice I had was to have the C+

> done here in the states, or

> go to England for the BHR (which as I said would

> have been nearly

> impossible), so I didn't bother to research the

> differences between the two

> devices. At this time, I would be perfectly happy

> with any one of the

> three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the surgeons

> are good, or they wouldn't

> be participating in the trials or have so many

> people traveling such

> distances to get to them.

>

> I certainly NEVER intend to get into the debate of

> " ours " vs. " yours " or

> NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them are

> perfect and we are all

> seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really ugly of

> each of them.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Ravi

Welcome to the site. Is it true what's in the UK newspapers - they say that its

very cheap to have a BHR or Hip replacement in India. From what I've seen on

our TV your top hospitals are as good as those in any part of the world.

Best Wishes

Re: Cormet 2000 and

> Conserve plus

>

>

> At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

> >

> >With all due respect I would like to point out

> that the UK price for hip

> >resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If you

> want the top surgeons then

> >like anywhere in the world they cost a little bit

> more. Because

> >Resurfacing has been done for many years over

> here there are a lot of

> >experienced surgeons who work in the private

> sector (i.e. insurance job or

> >paying patient).

>

> ,

>

> I'm not knocking either the devices or the

> surgeons. I was pointing out

> that in MY situation, I would not have been able

> to afford to travel to

> England, and I don't think we were aware of the

> Belgium option at the

> time. The only choice I had was to have the C+

> done here in the states, or

> go to England for the BHR (which as I said would

> have been nearly

> impossible), so I didn't bother to research the

> differences between the two

> devices. At this time, I would be perfectly happy

> with any one of the

> three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the surgeons

> are good, or they wouldn't

> be participating in the trials or have so many

> people traveling such

> distances to get to them.

>

> I certainly NEVER intend to get into the debate of

> " ours " vs. " yours " or

> NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them are

> perfect and we are all

> seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really ugly of

> each of them.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi

Thanks.

Yes,a BHR costs below INR 200,000 which is USD 4100

approx.This includes the cost of the

prosthesis,professional fee and hospital charges.A THR

costs as much.

I have not seen any hospital outside India, but yes,

the top hospitals here are very good and equipped to

int.standards.

Ravi

--- roger frost wrote:

> Hi Ravi

> Welcome to the site. Is it true what's in the UK

> newspapers - they say that its very cheap to have a

> BHR or Hip replacement in India. From what I've

> seen on our TV your top hospitals are as good as

> those in any part of the world.

> Best Wishes

> Re: Cormet 2000 and

> > Conserve plus

> >

> >

> > At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

> > >

> > >With all due respect I would like to point

> out

> > that the UK price for hip

> > >resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If

> you

> > want the top surgeons then

> > >like anywhere in the world they cost a little

> bit

> > more. Because

> > >Resurfacing has been done for many years over

> > here there are a lot of

> > >experienced surgeons who work in the private

> > sector (i.e. insurance job or

> > >paying patient).

> >

> > ,

> >

> > I'm not knocking either the devices or the

> > surgeons. I was pointing out

> > that in MY situation, I would not have been

> able

> > to afford to travel to

> > England, and I don't think we were aware of

> the

> > Belgium option at the

> > time. The only choice I had was to have the

> C+

> > done here in the states, or

> > go to England for the BHR (which as I said

> would

> > have been nearly

> > impossible), so I didn't bother to research

> the

> > differences between the two

> > devices. At this time, I would be perfectly

> happy

> > with any one of the

> > three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the

> surgeons

> > are good, or they wouldn't

> > be participating in the trials or have so many

> > people traveling such

> > distances to get to them.

> >

> > I certainly NEVER intend to get into the

> debate of

> > " ours " vs. " yours " or

> > NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them

> are

> > perfect and we are all

> > seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really

> ugly of

> > each of them.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Hello Ravi

Keep us informed about you op. at the end of the month. Which hospital etc?

Rog

Re: Cormet 2000 and

> > Conserve plus

> >

> >

> > At 02:19 AM 7/1/2002 +0100, you wrote:

> > >

> > >With all due respect I would like to point

> out

> > that the UK price for hip

> > >resurfacing can be the same as Belgium. If

> you

> > want the top surgeons then

> > >like anywhere in the world they cost a little

> bit

> > more. Because

> > >Resurfacing has been done for many years over

> > here there are a lot of

> > >experienced surgeons who work in the private

> > sector (i.e. insurance job or

> > >paying patient).

> >

> > ,

> >

> > I'm not knocking either the devices or the

> > surgeons. I was pointing out

> > that in MY situation, I would not have been

> able

> > to afford to travel to

> > England, and I don't think we were aware of

> the

> > Belgium option at the

> > time. The only choice I had was to have the

> C+

> > done here in the states, or

> > go to England for the BHR (which as I said

> would

> > have been nearly

> > impossible), so I didn't bother to research

> the

> > differences between the two

> > devices. At this time, I would be perfectly

> happy

> > with any one of the

> > three m/m devices, and I'm sure all the

> surgeons

> > are good, or they wouldn't

> > be participating in the trials or have so many

> > people traveling such

> > distances to get to them.

> >

> > I certainly NEVER intend to get into the

> debate of

> > " ours " vs. " yours " or

> > NHS vs. whatever. Unfortunately, none of them

> are

> > perfect and we are all

> > seeing the good, bad, and sometimes really

> ugly of

> > each of them.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

certainly,i shall keep this group posted.

Hosp:Apollo Speciality Hospital, Chennai (MADRAS).

The surgeon: Dr.Vijay C Bose.

Ravi

--- roger frost wrote:

> Hello Ravi

> Keep us informed about you op. at the end of the

> month. Which hospital etc?

> Rog

> Re: Cormet 2000 and

> > Conserve plus

> >

> >

> > i do not know if anybody in this group is

> aware

> > that

> > BHR is done in India too.The surgeon here is

> > perhaps

> > the only one in the Whole of Asia who does a

> > BHR.He

> > has been trained by Mr.. I am a BHR

> candidate

> > waiting to undergo the surgery by end july.

> > Ravi

> > --- roger frost

> > wrote:

> > > Hi

> > > I didn't take it that way but people joining

> the

> > > site recently may have misunderstood you and

> > thought

> > > the cost in the UK was high. I just wanted

> to

> > point

> > > out it was cheaper here than the US.

> Incidently

> > I

> > > have see whispers in our press that in India

> (in

> > > American Hospitals) they are doing BHR

> > operations

> > > for 10,000 US Dollars and less. These are

> > totally

> > > private sector hospitals.

> > > I am sorry if you thought I was having a go.

> I

> > > wasn't. Sometimes you type out an e-mail and

> it

> > can

> > > be read in different ways. I was just

> making

> > the

> > > point for people who haven't got insurance

> cover

> > > that they can save a great deal of money.

> > > Rog

> > > ----- Original Message -----

>

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

I am just 7 days post op from Dr. DeSmet with bilateral simultaneous surgery and

doing great, thank you very much!

Dr. DeSmet told me that the McMinn device is safer from the standpoint of

carbides and the metal ion issue. The device is less safe in this regard.

Saeed

Madison, WI (R and R ing in Gent Belgium)

[Guest guest]

This discussion centers around the McMinn device vrs. the device. In

this context, are the BHR and Comet devices considered to be McMinn, and the

a standalone product since McMinn designed both BHR and the Corin??

Please excuse if this is a goofy question from a relative newbie, I's just

trying to keep up. Thanks

Shef

[Guest guest]

At 05:15 PM 7/9/2002 -0400, you wrote:

>Dr. DeSmet told me that the McMinn device is safer from the standpoint of

>carbides and the metal ion issue. The device is less safe in this

>regard.

I just took a quick peek at Dr. DeSmet's website. One needs to be a bit

careful and realize that although his English may be quite good, there may

be some language error. Quoting from his site (speaking about the BHR),

" Important to mention is the fact that this prosthesis is casted, NOT heat

treated and containing many carbides on the metal surface, all necessary to

obtain an ideal low wear friction couple! "

That statement would lead me to believe that carbides are good, and the BHR

is particularly well-endowed with them.

[Guest guest]

At 01:52 AM 7/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:

>This discussion centers around the McMinn device vrs. the device. In

>this context, are the BHR and Comet devices considered to be McMinn, and the

> a standalone product since McMinn designed both BHR and the Corin??

>Please excuse if this is a goofy question from a relative newbie, I's just

>trying to keep up.

Shef,

The biggest difference that I know of between and BHR/Corin is the

way the backing is applied to the acetabular surface. Some will claim that

the heat treatment applied to the C+ weakens the metal slightly. Maybe

important in airplane parts, but I'm betting not enough to matter for a hip

joint. And IIRC, the only fracture of a component that we know of is

Gaz's BHR acetabular component that was revised a few months ago-a freak

occurence I'm sure. The BHR also has the dysplasia cup with a place for a

screw installation. You will hear good and bad on all sides about this

item as well

Unless you are just rolling in spare bucks (euros, yen, deutschmarks,

whatever), and find the differences to be so great that you are willing to

spend any amount of money to go anywhere, then I guess the differences may

mean a lot. I believe the differences between all three of them are subtle

and would have been thrilled with any one of them. For most of us, it is a

matter of what our insurance will pay for (and if not, which

country/surgeon can we afford), and the proximity of a resurfacing surgeon.

I haven't been to either the Corin or Midmedtech sites for awhile--check

them out and see if the differences are apparent. Hope I haven't just

muddied the waters more...

C+ 5/25/01 and 6/28/01

[Guest guest]

Shef

As I understand it the previous Corin was a McMinn design and not the current

model.

When for whatever reason he and Corin went their separate ways he partnered up

with Ronan Treacy who jointly developed what we now know as the BHR.

McMinn & Ronan Treacy are both consultant surgeons at the Royal

Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham in the UK. They both work for the NHS and also

the private sector.

McMinn has also studied knee surgery in New York. Where for some years the

UK has been the leader in hip joint surgery the USA has been the leader in knee

joint surgery. (This view will not be accepted by all and as always with these

things it depends on who writes the history books). He is now endeavouring to

bring better knee surgery to the UK.

The differences between all the systems will be argued over for some years to

come. Let's be thankful we have them because from this site it's quite plain

that there all successful.

Best Wishes to you

Re: Cormet 2000 and Conserve plus

This discussion centers around the McMinn device vrs. the device. In

this context, are the BHR and Comet devices considered to be McMinn, and the

a standalone product since McMinn designed both BHR and the Corin??

Please excuse if this is a goofy question from a relative newbie, I's just

trying to keep up. Thanks

Shef

[Guest guest]

Hello all

I have been a lurker on this site for some time now. 35 years old, avn of the

left hip due to a car accident. I am getting to the point of serioulsy

considering surgery in the next few years.

I have a graduate degree in engineering and have some friends that work in the

industrial metals. I gave them the specs that I was able to come up with on the

European and Medical resurfacing products.

They told me that both systems were made out of virtually identical metals.

Cobalt Chrome Alloy. The major difference to them was the processing. It seems

that the European components spray a plasma coat on the back of the acetabular

cup while the Medical system applies small bb's that are attaced by a

short heat treatment. They stated that both processes have advantages and

disadvantages to be considered.

The plasma spay does take less heat, but is more likey to peel away from the

base metal of the cup over time. There position was that the Corin product's

spray of HA (ha is a calcium phospate grit type material) was even more likely

to " peel " away from the base metal of the cup due to lower bonding pressures.

These stray particles would then become loose bodies or gritty material that

could cause wear problems in the future.

Medical's process of coating tiny cobalt chrome bbs on the back of the

cup and heading them to create a fusion is a bit more stable, but could cause

additional stray ion release if the articular surface were not machined to a

very high tolerance.

My friends seemed to be more concerned about the overall thickness of the

acetabular cups. They were woundering how much these components would deform

over time. My personal OS has told me that femoral heads and necks feel 5 to 6

times body weight in some situations. If the cups are too thin, they could

become more eliptical than round over time create more particle wear as the

components age.

I was unable to find out what thickness each system utalizes for each component.

I will continue to look for that as well as the tolerances that each system

utalizes.

Until later

Ben

Gronbach wrote: At 05:15 PM 7/9/2002 -0400, you

wrote:

>Dr. DeSmet told me that the McMinn device is safer from the standpoint of

>carbides and the metal ion issue. The device is less safe in this

>regard.

I just took a quick peek at Dr. DeSmet's website. One needs to be a bit

careful and realize that although his English may be quite good, there may

be some language error. Quoting from his site (speaking about the BHR),

" Important to mention is the fact that this prosthesis is casted, NOT heat

treated and containing many carbides on the metal surface, all necessary to

obtain an ideal low wear friction couple! "

That statement would lead me to believe that carbides are good, and the BHR

is particularly well-endowed with them.

[Guest guest]

Your description of " European " products applies to the Corin, but not

BHR. With BHR, the beaded ingrowth surface of the acetabular

component is part of the original casting, there is no further

process involved to apply it.

Mr McMinn believes that further heat processes deplete carbides in

the metal and that this adversely affects wear resistance.

See http://www.midmedtec.co.uk/develop.htm#poro

Regards,

Vale

>

> >Dr. DeSmet told me that the McMinn device is safer from the

standpoint of

> >carbides and the metal ion issue. The device is less safe

in this

> >regard.

>

> I just took a quick peek at Dr. DeSmet's website. One needs to be

a bit

> careful and realize that although his English may be quite good,

there may

> be some language error. Quoting from his site (speaking about the

BHR),

> " Important to mention is the fact that this prosthesis is casted,

NOT heat

> treated and containing many carbides on the metal surface, all

necessary to

> obtain an ideal low wear friction couple! "

>

> That statement would lead me to believe that carbides are good, and

the BHR

> is particularly well-endowed with them.

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Ben

Further to 's comments differentiating between the Cormet 2000

and BHR devices:

My understanding is that the HA (hydroxy-appetite) coating which is

on the ingrowth side of the acetabular component of all three devices

is rapidly amalgamated into the new bone growth, thus securing the

cup into the acetabulum.

The plasma sprayed material on the Cormet which creates the rough

texture for the bone to grow into is TITANIUM. This, I would think,

is a much greater concern than calcium phosphate HA in terms of long

term abrasion to the articulating surfaces.

I know that Corin had to improve the plasma spraying process they

were using, as the early models of their device shed the titanium

fragments quite readily with handling. Hopefully this is not a

problem now.

Terry H - RH BHR (With cast in beads)

>

> Hello all

> They told me that both systems were made out of virtually identical

metals. Cobalt Chrome Alloy. The major difference to them was the

processing. It seems that the European components spray a plasma

coat on the back of the acetabular cup while the Medical

system applies small bb's that are attaced by a short heat

treatment. They stated that both processes have advantages and

disadvantages to be considered.

> The plasma spay does take less heat, but is more likey to peel away

from the base metal of the cup over time. There position was that

the Corin product's spray of HA (ha is a calcium phospate grit type

material) was even more likely to " peel " away from the base metal of

the cup due to lower bonding pressures. These stray particles would

then become loose bodies or gritty material that could cause wear

problems in the future.

> Until later

> Ben

[Guest guest]

Hi Terry

Thanks for the input. To my understanding the BHR and Conserve Plus do not use

any type of HA coatings. They simply have a porous surface made from metal. I

guess that BHR casts theirs on and C+ melts them on.

My personal OS told me that when the HA coatings first came out, they were all

the rage. He tells me that HA does not resorb anywhere as near as origionally

intended. He stated that they do not completely resorb for over 10 years and

tend to fall off much easier than heated on, sprayed, or cast on metal. He used

to use an HA coated stem for standard hip replacements, but stopped due to

follow up xrays showing little beads of HA floating around in the joint.

Terry, you mentioned titanium beads. Did you mean cobalt chrome or is the BHR

Cup made out of titanium?

terryshooper2 wrote: Hi Ben

Further to 's comments differentiating between the Cormet 2000

and BHR devices:

My understanding is that the HA (hydroxy-appetite) coating which is

on the ingrowth side of the acetabular component of all three devices

is rapidly amalgamated into the new bone growth, thus securing the

cup into the acetabulum.

The plasma sprayed material on the Cormet which creates the rough

texture for the bone to grow into is TITANIUM. This, I would think,

is a much greater concern than calcium phosphate HA in terms of long

term abrasion to the articulating surfaces.

I know that Corin had to improve the plasma spraying process they

were using, as the early models of their device shed the titanium

fragments quite readily with handling. Hopefully this is not a

problem now.

Terry H - RH BHR (With cast in beads)

>

> Hello all

> They told me that both systems were made out of virtually identical

metals. Cobalt Chrome Alloy. The major difference to them was the

processing. It seems that the European components spray a plasma

coat on the back of the acetabular cup while the Medical

system applies small bb's that are attaced by a short heat

treatment. They stated that both processes have advantages and

disadvantages to be considered.

> The plasma spay does take less heat, but is more likey to peel away

from the base metal of the cup over time. There position was that

the Corin product's spray of HA (ha is a calcium phospate grit type

material) was even more likely to " peel " away from the base metal of

the cup due to lower bonding pressures. These stray particles would

then become loose bodies or gritty material that could cause wear

problems in the future.

> Until later

> Ben

[Guest guest]

>

> Hi Terry

> Thanks for the input. To my understanding the BHR and Conserve

Plus do not use any type of HA coatings. They simply have a porous

surface made from metal.

The BHR does use HA on its " Porocast " ingrowth surface - see MMT site.

Vale

[Guest guest]

I am sorry to hear that BHR uses a porocast of HA. I spent the past day or so

lookig into HA and it's advantages. Anyone looking for good scientific articles

simply needs to go to the yahoo search engine and type in calcium phospate.

Most of the articles report low resorption rates and soft tissue inflamation. I

am very concerned about this especially since my personal OS stopped using HA

coated stems because of floating bodies.

Wounder if they could make one without the HA coating. Any suggestions on who

to contact?

grantonuk wrote:

>

> Hi Terry

> Thanks for the input. To my understanding the BHR and Conserve

Plus do not use any type of HA coatings. They simply have a porous

surface made from metal.

The BHR does use HA on its " Porocast " ingrowth surface - see MMT site.

Vale