Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: Unhappy Recipients?

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

I meant to say, " The one thing that bothers me just a bit is the fact

that I have NOT read any testimonials from surface replacement

recipients that speak to the procedure as having been a negative

experience for them " .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark,

I had my left hip resurfaced on 01/26/00, and I am enjoying my new life. I

have had absolutely no pain or discomfort since the surgery. Oops, I forgot

about physical therapy, but even that was a positive experience: I was able

to regain my original flexibility. I'm 41, and I feel like a teenager. I

cannot thank Dr. Amstutz enough.

Don H

sivartkram@... wrote:

> Hip resurfacing appears to be an excellent procedure!

>

> I am personally sold on the technique and hope to be able to toss the

> phrase, " total hip replacement " completely out of my

> vocabulary, except when I tell folks that I didn't have to go

> the THP route when I had my hip repaired.

>

> The one thing that bothers me just a bit is the fact that I have found

> read any testimonials from surface replacement recipients that speak

> to the procedure as having been a negative experience for them.

>

> Given, there are a very limited number of resurfacing recipients when

> compared to THR recipients, but I am still surprised that I have not

> seen a few testimonials regarding the negative side of surface

> replacement.

>

> Please understand that I am not complaining, only asking a lot of

> questions as I move forward with what I feel is the RIGHT procedure

> for me.

>

> Mark

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

> I meant to say, " The one thing that bothers me just a bit is the fact

> that I have NOT read any testimonials from surface replacement

> recipients that speak to the procedure as having been a negative

> experience for them " .

Mark,

One reason I started this forum was to see if there are any people

developing problems with their surface replacements (this was after

I decided to have it done myself, but I also had not heard of any

negative experiences and there were just a few in hundreds in documentation

provided by Dr. Amstutz -- even those had special circumstances).

Since putting my info out on the net, I still have not heard

of any major problems. In email I have gotten a story of

lingering pain from someone who had a hemi-resurfacing, that seems

to be a more difficult thing to get to work perfectly.

Knock on simulated woodgrain finish the success continues!

Good luck to you,

-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> There are most definitly cases of surface replacement

in which the outcome was not what was expected or hoped for (i.e.

negative) and those individuals have gone on to the have the

traditional total hip replacement. <<

I had my resurfacing in May of 2000 by Dr. Amstutz at JRI. I was told at the

time that out of 345+ resurfacing procedures that were performed with the

latest Conserve Plus, there were only 3 failures ... One was because the

patient became too active (and was warned not to over do it) before the

prothesis had a chance to heal ... Another was really not a candidate for the

operation from the beginning ... and the other was (if I can remember) the

victim of an infection ...

Was anyone else told of these results ... Did Dr. Schmalzried at JRI show any

statistics to back this up ... who were these failures so far ...

P.J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To all those who are interested and those that have E-mailed me as

opposed to posting on the list:

I spoke to Dr. Schmalzried at the Joint Replacement Institute

yesterday. The phone consultation was in regard to my application

for participation in the metal on metal surface replacement clinical

trial. During our conversation I asked Dr. Schmalzried

about " negative " results with the surface replacement device

and procedure. He was very clear in his response and asked me to

pass along his comments to the E-group and any others I have contact

with. Here is my paraphrase of what Dr. Schmalzried has to say about

negative results in surface replacement:

Paraphrase - There are most definitly cases of surface replacement

in which the outcome was not what was expected or hoped for (i.e.

negative) and those individuals have gone on to the have the

traditional total hip replacement. The information that is out there

on the web and included in the " marketing literature " that is

sent to

prospective surface replacement clinical trial participants is biased

and not telling the entire story. Surface replacement is not a

miracle cure, we have a long way to go and this is nothing more than

another step in the struggle to develop a better and longer lasting

prosthesis. This is a " clinical trial " and as such is

designed for

the purpose of gathering data. We don't know what m/m surface

replacement is going to look long term and that is exactly why we are

conducting the trial. By participating in the trial you are taking a

risk. The risk is unknown and you could have poor results and then

have to move on to a THR. That is the risk you take when you

participate in a clinical trial.

As to the procedural differences between JRI and the UK surface

replacement that have been discussed on E groups and else where, Dr.

Schmalzried had the following to say: he requires a 6 week period on

crutches or less than 100% weight-bearing because of his

philosophical approach to bone healing and not because you could not

weight-bear on the surface replacement at 24 hours. He stated that

his view (and that of his colleagues) is that the bone has

been " injured " during the resurfacing. This " injury "

is then allowed

to heal in the same way that you would allow any broken bone to heal,

either in a cast for six weeks or some other form of less than total

weight bearing. He further stated that he felt it is critical to

allow the bone/metal interface to heal properly before weight-bearing

in order to give the prosthesis optimal conditions for long term

success. In regard to the UK prosthesis, Dr. Schmalzried said that

the UK is on their 4th generation of their resurfacing device and

that they are no further ahead than we are when it comes to this

procedure. He said that the current M/M acetabulum cup JRI is using

has NO incidence of failure due to the beads coming off (something

that was suggested by the rep in the UK because the JRI cup does not

have beads that are poured as part of the original casting). End of

paraphrase.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> Paraphrase - There are most definitly cases of surface replacement

> in which the outcome was not what was expected or hoped for (i.e.

> negative) and those individuals have gone on to the have the

> traditional total hip replacement. The information that is out

there

> on the web and included in the " marketing literature " that is

> sent to

> prospective surface replacement clinical trial participants is

biased

> and not telling the entire story.

Mark,

Interesting, but I think it is unhelpful to say that " the information

which is out there is biased " , without specifying what information

(all of it??) and what is wrong with it. Are the published statistics

lies, or presented misleadingly, or selected in some way?

Without more specifics, it's just spreading fear, uncertainty and

doubt.

On the differences in recovery protocols, does he have any clinical

evidence or is it opinion (not that there is anything wrong with

opinion - just nice to know the basis). McMinn's patients (I am one

of them) certainly go to full weightbearing early, so I guess his

opinion is different. With over 1,000 resurfacings performed over

about 9 years (5+ years with a consistent procedure) you would think

he would start to notice problems.

Dave Vale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

>

>> Paraphrase - There are most definitly cases of surface replacement

>> in which the outcome was not what was expected or hoped for (i.e.

>> negative) and those individuals have gone on to the have the

>> traditional total hip replacement. The information that is out

>there

>> on the web and included in the " marketing literature " that is

>> sent to

>> prospective surface replacement clinical trial participants is

>biased

>> and not telling the entire story.

>

>Mark,

>

>Interesting, but I think it is unhelpful to say that " the information

>which is out there is biased " , without specifying what information

>(all of it??) and what is wrong with it. Are the published statistics

>lies, or presented misleadingly, or selected in some way?

>

One other thought is that we don't know which procedure the good doctor is

referring to. All resurfacings (even the earliest failed attempts?) Only

those of the clinical trials? What percentage of these required revision.

If the number is small (< 1%) then what were the circumstances. Failures at

such small percentages cannot be used to deduce trends--usually. It would

be good to know if the failures, e.g. only applied to people with advanced

AVN ( I remember seeing in one piece of literature that one resurfacing had

the femoral head collapse in this case. No, I don't have the source with

me.) That would be different.

I appreciate the information and this was the right question to ask. The

doctor's response was certainly well-intentioned, but as Disraeli said,

there are " lies, damned lies and statistics " (no my fellow Americans, it

was *not* Mark Twain who said it first!). Reading a full report on the

failures is about the only way to ferret this out. Even that might give you

fits. References anyone?

Finally, I think that the marketing literature would tend top be a bit less

biased in the US, since we are quite litigation happy. A few misleading

words in a brochure ushering in a nice big thumping disaster would easily

put the company out of business. I would expect some fine print where they

disavow any liability, claim it doesn't work anyway and distance themselves

from their own product as far as they can without giving up the revenues.

>Without more specifics, it's just spreading fear, uncertainty and

>doubt.

>

Known as the " FUD-factor " .

>On the differences in recovery protocols, does he have any clinical

>evidence or is it opinion (not that there is anything wrong with

>opinion - just nice to know the basis). McMinn's patients (I am one

>of them) certainly go to full weightbearing early, so I guess his

>opinion is different. With over 1,000 resurfacings performed over

>about 9 years (5+ years with a consistent procedure) you would think

>he would start to notice problems.

>

>Dave Vale

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Hippies,

Having said what I said and thoroughly stirred the hornets nest ...

let me qualify my position by saying that I have decided to move

forward with surface replacement via Dr. Schmalzried ... so, please

don't confuse me with one who does not still think this is the right

way to go. Yes, even with the gloom and doom I have infected this

site with, I am going ahead with the procedure.

And like many of you that have already been down this road, the next

hurdle is with my insurance company. So, if you have a strategy that

worked for you, please feel free to E-mail it to me!

If for some reason my insurance does not come through I will

seriously consider flying to England and having the procedure done

there for $12,000 out of pocket (can you say second mortgage). In

which case we can have a lively conversation upon my return, without

crutches … HA HA HA!

Have a Good Weekend!

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...