Re: Resurfacing or PAO . For CINDY

[Guest guest]

Hi Cindy

I was wondering if I could ask....you had your hip/s resurfaced in

1996, how do they feel today? That's been ~10yrs. Do you feel that

resurfacing could benefit someone, who used to be very active, under

the age of 30?

Thankyou,

Becky )

>

>

> > I guess if its all

> >about extending the life of our hips then why am I not being

> >influenced in the direction of PAO first. Is resurfacing going to

be

> >the 'new thing' in preserving our hips. I've read a lot about both,

> >but I haven't met anyone else who's been given such freedom of

> >choice, most seem to be influenced one way or another.

>

>

> Becky,

>

> I suspect that a PAO specialist is not also going to be a

resurfacing

> specialist and vice-versa. Therefore, they are both likely to

point you

> down the path of their particular specialty, which then leaves you

to

> become informed (which obviously you are doing), and choose which

feels

> best for YOU! I was so far beyond eligibility for PAO, so that

option was

> eliminated for me (in 1996), so I went after resurfacing.

>

> Cindy

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

[Guest guest]

Ah yes, catywampus, that's what I'm after...much better than the

ensteinian shuffle I now sport.... - Bob

> >Hi Cindy

> >

> >I was wondering if I could ask....you had your hip/s resurfaced in

> >1996, how do they feel today? That's been ~10yrs. Do you feel that

> >resurfacing could benefit someone, who used to be very active,

under

> >the age of 30?

> Becky,

>

> I was turned down for PAO in 1996. I was told to come back when I

couldn't

> stand the pain any more and he would then do THR's, but he was

hoping it

> would be at least ten years before I came back. From then on, I

became

> more and more disabled. Not really more pain (after all, bone on

bone can

> only hurt so bad), but more and more restricted so that I couldn't

even put

> on socks without a sock helper for about two years pre-op. I was

> resurfaced in 2001 (thus the dates after my signature), so am just

over

> three years out. If my only choice were resurfacing vs THR, for

me, that

> would be a no-brainer. I have a friend who has bilateral

dysplasia and has

> had a PAO and now bilat THR's and she has had nothing but trouble

with

> them, so I am incredibly biased towards resurfacing ;-)

>

> I, on the other hand, am still improving, and am actually

considering

> walking a marathon as one of my long-term goals. I finally did my

> anniversary hike to the top of Multnomah Falls yesterday. My legs

are

> sore, and yes, I have blisters, but the hips have absolutely no

pain! When

> I got to the top, I knelt down and dunked my face in the water--a

baptism

> of sorts. There was no consideration about watching how I knelt,

and in

> fact, I realized that I was completely catywampus, bent way past

90

> degrees, knees splayed inward, feet turned every which way on the

rocks

> trying not to fall in. So it was more than just the walking part

that I

> still find miraculous. A friend of mine trains women to walk

marathons,

> and when she suggested I think about it a year ago, I told her

hell would

> have to freeze over first. Now here I am, seriously considering

it!

>

> One of the problems with CHD is that the funky joint mechanics

cause

> additional stress on an artificial joint, thus they tend to wear

out much

> faster than for those with " garden variety " OA. A joint that

might last 20

> years normally, may only last 7-10 in a dysplastic joint, thus the

need for

> more revisions. Also the dislocation rate for CHD patients is WAY

higher

> for standard THR's. With the new metal/metal resurfacing devices

(that are

> getting less new every day ;-), there has been almost NO

dislocation (I

> know of two--one guy fell off a tall ladder, and the other was

trying yoga

> poses only a few days post-op), and I have more faith in the

wearability of

> metal than I do of any form of plastic.

>

> Hope this helps...

> Cindy

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

[Guest guest]

Ah yes, catywampus, that's what I'm after...much better than the

ensteinian shuffle I now sport.... - Bob

> >Hi Cindy

> >

> >I was wondering if I could ask....you had your hip/s resurfaced in

> >1996, how do they feel today? That's been ~10yrs. Do you feel that

> >resurfacing could benefit someone, who used to be very active,

under

> >the age of 30?

> Becky,

>

> I was turned down for PAO in 1996. I was told to come back when I

couldn't

> stand the pain any more and he would then do THR's, but he was

hoping it

> would be at least ten years before I came back. From then on, I

became

> more and more disabled. Not really more pain (after all, bone on

bone can

> only hurt so bad), but more and more restricted so that I couldn't

even put

> on socks without a sock helper for about two years pre-op. I was

> resurfaced in 2001 (thus the dates after my signature), so am just

over

> three years out. If my only choice were resurfacing vs THR, for

me, that

> would be a no-brainer. I have a friend who has bilateral

dysplasia and has

> had a PAO and now bilat THR's and she has had nothing but trouble

with

> them, so I am incredibly biased towards resurfacing ;-)

>

> I, on the other hand, am still improving, and am actually

considering

> walking a marathon as one of my long-term goals. I finally did my

> anniversary hike to the top of Multnomah Falls yesterday. My legs

are

> sore, and yes, I have blisters, but the hips have absolutely no

pain! When

> I got to the top, I knelt down and dunked my face in the water--a

baptism

> of sorts. There was no consideration about watching how I knelt,

and in

> fact, I realized that I was completely catywampus, bent way past

90

> degrees, knees splayed inward, feet turned every which way on the

rocks

> trying not to fall in. So it was more than just the walking part

that I

> still find miraculous. A friend of mine trains women to walk

marathons,

> and when she suggested I think about it a year ago, I told her

hell would

> have to freeze over first. Now here I am, seriously considering

it!

>

> One of the problems with CHD is that the funky joint mechanics

cause

> additional stress on an artificial joint, thus they tend to wear

out much

> faster than for those with " garden variety " OA. A joint that

might last 20

> years normally, may only last 7-10 in a dysplastic joint, thus the

need for

> more revisions. Also the dislocation rate for CHD patients is WAY

higher

> for standard THR's. With the new metal/metal resurfacing devices

(that are

> getting less new every day ;-), there has been almost NO

dislocation (I

> know of two--one guy fell off a tall ladder, and the other was

trying yoga

> poses only a few days post-op), and I have more faith in the

wearability of

> metal than I do of any form of plastic.

>

> Hope this helps...

> Cindy

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

[Guest guest]

Ah yes, catywampus, that's what I'm after...much better than the

ensteinian shuffle I now sport.... - Bob

> >Hi Cindy

> >

> >I was wondering if I could ask....you had your hip/s resurfaced in

> >1996, how do they feel today? That's been ~10yrs. Do you feel that

> >resurfacing could benefit someone, who used to be very active,

under

> >the age of 30?

> Becky,

>

> I was turned down for PAO in 1996. I was told to come back when I

couldn't

> stand the pain any more and he would then do THR's, but he was

hoping it

> would be at least ten years before I came back. From then on, I

became

> more and more disabled. Not really more pain (after all, bone on

bone can

> only hurt so bad), but more and more restricted so that I couldn't

even put

> on socks without a sock helper for about two years pre-op. I was

> resurfaced in 2001 (thus the dates after my signature), so am just

over

> three years out. If my only choice were resurfacing vs THR, for

me, that

> would be a no-brainer. I have a friend who has bilateral

dysplasia and has

> had a PAO and now bilat THR's and she has had nothing but trouble

with

> them, so I am incredibly biased towards resurfacing ;-)

>

> I, on the other hand, am still improving, and am actually

considering

> walking a marathon as one of my long-term goals. I finally did my

> anniversary hike to the top of Multnomah Falls yesterday. My legs

are

> sore, and yes, I have blisters, but the hips have absolutely no

pain! When

> I got to the top, I knelt down and dunked my face in the water--a

baptism

> of sorts. There was no consideration about watching how I knelt,

and in

> fact, I realized that I was completely catywampus, bent way past

90

> degrees, knees splayed inward, feet turned every which way on the

rocks

> trying not to fall in. So it was more than just the walking part

that I

> still find miraculous. A friend of mine trains women to walk

marathons,

> and when she suggested I think about it a year ago, I told her

hell would

> have to freeze over first. Now here I am, seriously considering

it!

>

> One of the problems with CHD is that the funky joint mechanics

cause

> additional stress on an artificial joint, thus they tend to wear

out much

> faster than for those with " garden variety " OA. A joint that

might last 20

> years normally, may only last 7-10 in a dysplastic joint, thus the

need for

> more revisions. Also the dislocation rate for CHD patients is WAY

higher

> for standard THR's. With the new metal/metal resurfacing devices

(that are

> getting less new every day ;-), there has been almost NO

dislocation (I

> know of two--one guy fell off a tall ladder, and the other was

trying yoga

> poses only a few days post-op), and I have more faith in the

wearability of

> metal than I do of any form of plastic.

>

> Hope this helps...

> Cindy

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