Re: Going for a THR - Thanks for the responses

May 16, 2004

Excuse me- had to throw in my .02.

The bioengineering of resurfacing is (in my humble opinion) superior to a THR.

There are no muscles cut. There also is no stem inserted in your chopped off and

hollowed out femur! I had my surgery on a Wednesday, was released on a Friday

and spent 9 hours sight seeing in Bruges on Sunday. (Obviously I am a Belgium

hippy) I was on one crutch in 2 days and on the way home from Belgium

accidentally left my remaining crutch in a Starbucks in Boston. I returned to

work in 20 days and also was back at the gym. Cycling strong at 2 weeks and

rock climbing as soon as I could after the 6 week mark. That rates as a speedy

recovery in my book.

I applaud the fact that you are going to speak with a resurfacing doc- it is

best to have all of the information possible before you make such a life

changing decision. I spoke with 8 resurfacing docs. Good luck to you.

Rock climbin' Jude

LBHR De Smet 09/11/02

Going for a THR - Thanks for the responses

I really appreciate the responses that I have received from my

previous posting. I would like to take this opportunity respond to

some of the things brought in those messages. Bob Gilbert has

actually done resurfacing, but feels that the THR is a better

procedure. But, he made it very clear that should I choose to

resurface I should select a surgeon that does a lot of resurfacing -

which would not be him. He knows and greatly respects Harlan

Amstutz. He is also knowledgable about Koen DeSmet, though he does

not know him personally. We spoke of what device to use if I do go

with the THR, and he did bring up the matter of metal ion toxicity.

He said there are people concerned about it - I assured him that I

was not - to which he agreed, and suggested the devise mentioned by

Dave Pasterak in his post - the big head/metal on metal. One of the

advantages of THR over resurfacing, he feels, is the size of the

incision and therefore the recovery time. He uses a very small

incision, cutting no muscle, so the patient is up much faster and

the healing time is quicker - and with the large head, the chances

of dislocation are greatly reduced. I believe he said that he had

had two dislocations in the last 250 THR's that he had performed.

With regard to my NTRP rating, I know that I will not be at a 5.0

level again. Too many other problems with the bod. (Actually, I

have been asking about a total body replacement - from the neck

down - but I haven't found the right donor yet.) If I can play at a

4.5 level, which I am told is possible with the THR, I will be very

happy.

Finally, I may go to a squadron reunion in August in Washington DC,

and would be able to see Mont at that time. Since several

of you recommended that I speak with a surgeon who does resurfacing,

I may well do that.

In my first post I forgot to sign at the end of my message, though

June addressed me as " Mr. Whale " , based upon my Yahoo ID. " Whale "

was my call sign in Vietnam, where I flew F-4's for the Marine

Corps. , thanks for the Semper Fi, and, again, thanks to all

of you for your feedback.

Whale

May 17, 2004

The size of the incision has NOTHING to do with the huge mobility and impact

absorbing advantages of resurfacing. In addtion, there is no comparison to the

range of motion which is important in agile sports like tennis.

Small incision THR is the most overated new " advances " in THR. All that it

allows you to do is to have quicker revisions once you become active again in

tennis.

Remember there have been " championship " athletic performances in badmitton,

Ironman Triathalons, and marathons in resurfacings- not just participation.

Saeed

simulataneous bilateral 7-2-02, Dr. K. DeSmet

May 17, 2004

> The size of the incision has NOTHING to do with the huge mobility

and impact

> absorbing advantages of resurfacing. In addtion, there is no

comparison to the

> range of motion which is important in agile sports like tennis.

> Small incision THR is the most overated new " advances " in THR. All

that it

> allows you to do is to have quicker revisions once you become

active again in

> tennis.

> Remember there have been " championship " athletic performances in

badmitton,

> Ironman Triathalons, and marathons in resurfacings- not just

participation.

>

> Saeed

>

> simulataneous bilateral 7-2-02, Dr. K. DeSmet

Saeed,

Good point. Minimally invasive has many connotationS. The size of a

scar has nothing to do with whether or not something is minimally

invasive or not. Trust me I know. Small skin incisions are simply a

marketing tool for the uninformed. It doesn't matter what the size

or length of the scar is. What counts is the dissection underneath

the skin and frankly I would rather have a larger incision if it

makes my surgical dissection easier. Thats how I practice vascular

surgery and that is how I want my OS to practice on me! :-) Good

visualization makes for easier surgery which makes for better surgery

which makes for happier surgeons and patients.

Regards,

Dr. Mark

May 17, 2004

Hi Saeed,

I too get somewhat bemused that these surgeons set out to convince someone

that having a small incision is something to be prized............. When

facing the choice between having my femur head cut off and a piece of metal

jammed down one of the prime marrow factories in my body and a scar a few

inches longer I know which choice made more sense to me.............

I shake my head and then remember that there are also surgeons out there

that think it is a great idea to fuse peoples hip joints and hang the

consequences to the rest of their body.......... Or tell people to go suffer

for a few more years until their hip problems are unbearable - again

appearing to give little thought to what sort of disaster is going to be

visited upon every other joint in their body................and how hard it

is going to be to 'normalize' life one day in the future when they get a hip

replacement.

Sometimes I think there is quite a deal missing in some doctors

educations............and sadly many of them simply are not qualified to

issue the advice they so readily give............

Edith LBHR Dr. L Walter Syd Aust 8/02

> The size of the incision has NOTHING to do with the huge mobility and

impact

> absorbing advantages of resurfacing. In addtion, there is no comparison to

the