DrMont

December 29, 2002

wrote:

My questions are these: How many of you are Dr. Mont's patients and

are in my age range? Also, did he tell each of you the same thing?

How many of you awoke from the surgery with a total hip replacement

,

I am age 60--a very active 60 year old skier, hiker and cyclist--

and went to Dr Mont for a resurfacing on May 20. Dr Mont had

reviewed my x-rays, and told me I was a good candidate for

resurfacing. Although I had never met Dr Mont and did not meet him

until AFTER the operation (this was a mistake on my part!), I felt

confident in his judgment based on postings I had read on this site.

I had also seen Dr Schmalzreid at JRI and he also told me the same

thing, but additionally told me I would do just as well with a M/M

THR. Basically, I felt confident I would receive a resurfaced joint

from Dr Mont since I had never been told or heard of any potential

problems that could result in conversion to a THR.

When I came out of surgery, I heard my wife talking to one of the

other Doctors about how they were going to tell me that I received a

M/M THR rather than the resurfacing. Since I was still groggy and

somewhat " out of it " , it did not especially bother me at the time.

When I saw Dr Mont later that afternoon, he explained that my femoral

neck was too large for the largest Conserve+ device and that they had

to convert to the M/M THR backup. He said that he had " notched " the

femoral neck on some patients who had similar problems to make the

Conserve+ femoral component fit, but that the only failures he had

with resurfacings were with those patients he had " notched " . I also

had a 1 " leg length discrepancy which he told me would be

difficult to correct with a resurfacing, and based on these reasons,

he decided to proceed with the THR backup.

Dr Mont's nurse, Esther, told me later that they could look at the

x-ray and see it might be close, but that because the x-ray is two-

dimensional, there was no way to really know until they opened me

up. Of course I now wish I had known this before going in for the

operation. Corin makes larger size devices for their resurfacing

components and will also custom make a device for patients with

larger femoral necks if they know ahead of time. Based on this, I

probably would have opted to go to Dr Gross to receive a C2K

resurfacing rather than to Dr Mont with the Conserve+. Dr Mont told

me during my 12 week checkup that WMT is now making larger size

components based partly on what happened to me. Anyway, hindsight is

20-20 and I am living with a M/M THR---and am totally happy with it!

I am now just past seven months post-op and it is difficult to

imagine a resurfacing could be any better than the THR I now have.

Whether this will remain true for the long term remains to be seen,

of course. Dr Schalzreid was apparently correct when he said I would

do as well with the M/M THR as the resurfacing, as difficult as I

found that to believe at the time. I have NO pain, NO limp, I bike,

I hike, and I ski---been skiing ten times this season already, hiking

for turns prior to the lifts opening and skiing as well as I ever had.

No doctor can give you an absolute guarantee that you will receive

a successful resurfacing prior to opening you up. A surgeon can give

you the resurfacing in almost any case, but since the devices are in

clinical trials, they do not want to bias the trial results by

putting them in potentially marginal patients. Needless to say, this

is also in your best interest too. Yes, you can get the resurfacing

converted to a THR if it fails, but it is another major surgery with

all the potential problems, pain and pitfalls that that entails.

I would say that if they tell you they are 95% certain you can be

resurfaced, GO FOR IT. If someone gave you those kind of lottery

odds for $280 million and the consolation prize was $100 million I

think you would take those odds. The M/M THR is AT LEAST the $100

million consolation price... This is from someone who is living with

the results and more than happy with the outcome, even if I would

have preferred the resurfacing. I also think Dr Mont is one of the

best surgeons doing this procedure--he matched my leg lengths

perfectly and more importantly, balanced the muscles and affected

ligaments superbly which is a much more difficult task. Best of luck

to you!!

December 30, 2002

I responded by email to your posting last night. But it was returned

to me as undeliverable. Here is what I wrote:

Thank you for responding to my questions with your story. After a

lot of research and some wonderful input from the folks here, I have

decided to have my surgery done by Dr.De Smet in Belgium and

eliminate the possibility of waking up to a THR.

I'm glad receiving a THR was ok with you and that you're happy with

the results. I feel certain that Dr. Mont is very good at what he

does. According to two evaluations, I am a good candidate for

resurfacing and am not willing to go into the OR without being

assured that's what I will receive. This is the best choice for me

and I'm so thankful that we have these choices. Thanks again.

>

> My questions are these: How many of you are Dr. Mont's patients

and

> are in my age range? Also, did he tell each of you the same thing?

> How many of you awoke from the surgery with a total hip replacement

>

> ,

> I am age 60--a very active 60 year old skier, hiker and cyclist--

> and went to Dr Mont for a resurfacing on May 20. Dr Mont had

> reviewed my x-rays, and told me I was a good candidate for

> resurfacing. Although I had never met Dr Mont and did not meet him

> until AFTER the operation (this was a mistake on my part!), I felt

> confident in his judgment based on postings I had read on this

site.

> I had also seen Dr Schmalzreid at JRI and he also told me the same

> thing, but additionally told me I would do just as well with a M/M

> THR. Basically, I felt confident I would receive a resurfaced

joint

> from Dr Mont since I had never been told or heard of any potential

> problems that could result in conversion to a THR.

>

> When I came out of surgery, I heard my wife talking to one of the

> other Doctors about how they were going to tell me that I received

a

> M/M THR rather than the resurfacing. Since I was still groggy and

> somewhat " out of it " , it did not especially bother me at the time.

> When I saw Dr Mont later that afternoon, he explained that my

femoral

> neck was too large for the largest Conserve+ device and that they

had

> to convert to the M/M THR backup. He said that he had " notched "

the

> femoral neck on some patients who had similar problems to make the

> Conserve+ femoral component fit, but that the only failures he had

> with resurfacings were with those patients he had " notched " . I

also

> had a 1 " leg length discrepancy which he told me would be

> difficult to correct with a resurfacing, and based on these

reasons,

> he decided to proceed with the THR backup.

>

> Dr Mont's nurse, Esther, told me later that they could look at

the

> x-ray and see it might be close, but that because the x-ray is two-

> dimensional, there was no way to really know until they opened me

> up. Of course I now wish I had known this before going in for the

> operation. Corin makes larger size devices for their resurfacing

> components and will also custom make a device for patients with

> larger femoral necks if they know ahead of time. Based on this, I

> probably would have opted to go to Dr Gross to receive a C2K

> resurfacing rather than to Dr Mont with the Conserve+. Dr Mont

told

> me during my 12 week checkup that WMT is now making larger size

> components based partly on what happened to me. Anyway, hindsight

is

> 20-20 and I am living with a M/M THR---and am totally happy with it!

>

> I am now just past seven months post-op and it is difficult to

> imagine a resurfacing could be any better than the THR I now have.

> Whether this will remain true for the long term remains to be seen,

> of course. Dr Schalzreid was apparently correct when he said I

would

> do as well with the M/M THR as the resurfacing, as difficult as I

> found that to believe at the time. I have NO pain, NO limp, I

bike,

> I hike, and I ski---been skiing ten times this season already,

hiking

> for turns prior to the lifts opening and skiing as well as I ever

had.

>

> No doctor can give you an absolute guarantee that you will

receive

> a successful resurfacing prior to opening you up. A surgeon can

give

> you the resurfacing in almost any case, but since the devices are

in

> clinical trials, they do not want to bias the trial results by

> putting them in potentially marginal patients. Needless to say,

this

> is also in your best interest too. Yes, you can get the

resurfacing

> converted to a THR if it fails, but it is another major surgery

with

> all the potential problems, pain and pitfalls that that entails.

>

> I would say that if they tell you they are 95% certain you can be

> resurfaced, GO FOR IT. If someone gave you those kind of lottery

> odds for $280 million and the consolation prize was $100 million I

> think you would take those odds. The M/M THR is AT LEAST the $100

> million consolation price... This is from someone who is living

with

> the results and more than happy with the outcome, even if I would

> have preferred the resurfacing. I also think Dr Mont is one of the

> best surgeons doing this procedure--he matched my leg lengths

> perfectly and more importantly, balanced the muscles and affected

> ligaments superbly which is a much more difficult task. Best of

luck

> to you!!

December 30, 2002