Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Knee Joint01:23

Knee Joint

The knee joint is the most complicated joint in the body. It consists of three articulations– two tibiofemoral and one patellofemoral. As is characteristic of synovial joints, the knee joint has a thin articular capsule that partially surrounds this joint cavity. Additionally, several ligaments, muscles, and cartilaginous structures support the movement of the knee.
A total of seven ligaments support the knee joint. The patellar ligament, which is also attached to the quadriceps femoris group...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Hepatocellular carcinoma in southern Germany: epidemiological and clinicopathological characteristics and risk factors.

Digestive diseases (Basel, Switzerland)·2002
Same author

Kidney function and glomerulopathy over 8 years in young patients with Type I (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus and microalbuminuria.

Diabetologia·2002
Same author

Massive steatosis hepatis: an unusual manifestation of Whipple's disease.

The American journal of gastroenterology·2002
Same author

Naftidrofuryl in the treatment of vascular dementia.

European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience·2002
Same author

Influence of nonylphenol on the microbial community of lake sediments in microcosms.

The Science of the total environment·2002
Same author

[Diagnosis of pancreas tumors: MRI or multidetector spiral CT?].

Kongressband. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Chirurgie. Kongress·2002

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 11, 2026

Potentiodynamic Corrosion Testing
08:43

Potentiodynamic Corrosion Testing

Published on: September 4, 2016

[Update on metal-on-metal hip joints].

K-P Günther1, J Lützner, F Hannemann

  • 1Klinik für Orthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Dresden, Deutschland. Annegret.Riemer@uniklinikum-dresden.de

Der Orthopade
|May 2, 2013
PubMed
Summary

Metal-on-metal hip implants carry risks, but small heads and resurfacing types show good survival. Large head metal-on-metal implants are not recommended due to poor outcomes.

More Related Videos

Biotribological Testing and Analysis of Articular Cartilage Sliding against Metal for Implants
09:08

Biotribological Testing and Analysis of Articular Cartilage Sliding against Metal for Implants

Published on: May 14, 2020

Protocol for the Evaluation of MRI Artifacts Caused by Metal Implants to Assess the Suitability of Implants and the Vulnerability of Pulse Sequences
08:19

Protocol for the Evaluation of MRI Artifacts Caused by Metal Implants to Assess the Suitability of Implants and the Vulnerability of Pulse Sequences

Published on: May 17, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 11, 2026

Potentiodynamic Corrosion Testing
08:43

Potentiodynamic Corrosion Testing

Published on: September 4, 2016

Biotribological Testing and Analysis of Articular Cartilage Sliding against Metal for Implants
09:08

Biotribological Testing and Analysis of Articular Cartilage Sliding against Metal for Implants

Published on: May 14, 2020

Protocol for the Evaluation of MRI Artifacts Caused by Metal Implants to Assess the Suitability of Implants and the Vulnerability of Pulse Sequences
08:19

Protocol for the Evaluation of MRI Artifacts Caused by Metal Implants to Assess the Suitability of Implants and the Vulnerability of Pulse Sequences

Published on: May 17, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic surgery
  • Biomaterials science
  • Adverse event monitoring

Context:

  • Metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants are associated with potential local and systemic adverse events.
  • The clinical significance and prevalence of these metal-associated issues remain under investigation.
  • Implant characteristics and patient factors influence adverse event development.

Purpose:

  • To review the risk factors associated with adverse events in metal-on-metal hip implants.
  • To discuss the clinical relevance and influencing factors of metal-associated problems.
  • To provide guidance on the use of MoM hip implants based on head size and type.

Summary:

  • While data on risk factors for adverse events with metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants are increasing, their prevalence and clinical relevance are debated.
  • Implant type, position, and patient-specific factors can affect outcomes.
  • Small MoM heads (≤32 mm) and certain resurfacing arthroplasties demonstrate good long-term survival.
  • Large head MoM implants (>36 mm) are advised against due to unsatisfactory results.

Impact:

  • Informs clinical decision-making regarding the selection of MoM hip implants.
  • Highlights the importance of considering implant size and type for patient outcomes.
  • Contributes to the ongoing debate on the safety and efficacy of MoM hip arthroplasty.