Factors Affecting Squeaking in Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacings. Issue 4 (July 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Imbuldeniya, Arjuna; Munir, Selin; Chow, Jason; Walter, William L.; Zicat, Bernard A.; Walter, William K.
• Is Part Of: Hip international. Volume 24:Issue 4(2014)
• Page Start: 340
• Page End: 346
• Publication Date: 2014-07
• Subjects: Hip resurfacing -- Squeaking -- Hip arthroplasty -- Noise generation -- Case-control; Hip joint -- Pathophysiology -- Periodicals; Hip joint -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Hip joint -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.581005
• DOI: 10.5301/hipint.5000137
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1120-7000

Abstract

We reviewed 380 hip resurfacings cases between December 1999 and Dec 2012. 11 cases (2.89%) squeaked postoperatively. Mean follow-up was 88.6 months (19-130 months). Mean time to squeak was 11.3 months (3-22 months). Ten (91%) cases were male and nine (81%) cases had a Birmingham hip resurfacing. Cases were matched for age, gender, BMI and implant to three controls. Radiographs were analysed using EBRA (Einzel-Bild-Roentgen-Analysis, University of Innsbruck, Austria) software to evaluate cup orientation. There was no significant difference between the mean inclination angle of the cups (p = 0.26) or the mean anteversion angle (p = 0.29). There was no difference in serum cobalt (p = 0.20) or serum chromium (p = 0.45) levels at latest follow-up. Three of the 11 (27.3%) cases had revision surgery at a mean follow-up of 101 months (72-117 months). Squeaking was not influenced by patient demographic parameters and resolved in all cases that did not undergo revision surgery. Males with a resurfacing head size <50 mm had significantly increased odds of squeaking when compared to controls (odds ratio = 26.6; 95% CI = 1.2-573.3; p<0.05). Based on our findings, we do not recommend that squeaking on its own should be an indication for revision of hip resurfacing components.