THRS are not all alike

[Guest guest]

Hi all:

I'm sorry but have not been able to see all the posts lately. I

just noticed this which was part of a series.

______________________________________________

" You are absolutely wrong. Properly installed, a THR

> will give the

> same range of motion of a properly installed surf

> job. In fact, in

> some cases a THR will give better ROM because a surf

> job does not

> have the adjustments that a THR has. "

______________________________________________________

This is not exactly correct. There are a huge variety of THR

prostheses available. They are designed for different purposes and

the vast majority of them, especially the " tried and true "

metal/plastic variety have limited range of motion. These were

designed for older patients, many of whom are limited in the extent

of activity.

The modern Metal/metal resurfacing devices are all very similar and

have a large range of motion because of the geometry of the large

head/ shallow cup design.

The Orthopedic surgeons who are performing resurfacing know all

about this. That is why they would be certain to use a Modern Metal/

Metal THR which has the same Geometry. This type would have the

same range of motion. It has nothing to do with " proper

installation " .

The problem is that " non-resurfacing " orthopedists are likely to use

an older device which they like, but is limited in ROM and likely to

dislocate. That's why the " 90 degree rule " and " no crossing legs "

applies to those particular types of THR's for the life of the

patient.

(MD) in NC

C+, (L) 3/31/03 Dr. vail