Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026

Potentiodynamic Corrosion Testing
Published on: September 4, 2016
High prevalence of adverse reactions to metal debris in small-headed ASR™ hips
Aleksi Reito1, Timo Puolakka, Petra Elo
1Coxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, P.O. Box 652, 33101, Tampere, Finland.
Background:
There has been increasing concern of metal-on-metal (MOM) hip replacements regarding adverse reactions to metal debris. Information regarding prevalence and risk factors for these adverse reactions is scarce.
Questions/Purposes:
The primary purposes of our study were to determine (1) the prevalence of adverse reactions to metal debris among patients who received small-headed (< 50 mm) Articular Surface Replacement (ASR™) prostheses in hip resurfacing procedures or the ASR™ XL prostheses during THAs at our institution, and (2) the risk factors for adverse reactions to metal debris and if they are different in hip resurfacing replacements compared with THAs?
Methods:
Small-headed ASR™ prostheses were used in 482 operations (424 patients) at our institution. After the recall of ASR™ prostheses, we established a systematic screening program to find patients with adverse reactions to metal debris. At a mean of 4.9 years (range, 0.2-8.1 years) postoperatively, 379 patients (435 hips) attended a screening program, which consisted of clinical evaluation, whole blood cobalt and chromium measurements, and cross-sectional imaging.
Results:
At followup, 162 hips (34%) have been revised. The majority (85%) were revised owing to causes related to adverse reactions to metal debris. The 7-year survivorship was 51% for the ASR™ hip replacement cohort and 38% for the ASR™ XL THA cohort, respectively. Reduced cup coverage was an independent risk factor for adverse reactions to metal debris in both cohorts. High preoperative ROM, use of the Corail(®) stem, and female gender were associated with an increased risk of adverse reactions to metal debris only in patients undergoing THA.
Conclusions:
Adverse reactions to metal debris are common with small-headed ASR™ prostheses. Risk factors for these adverse reactions differ between hip resurfacing procedures and THAs. Our results suggest a more complicated failure mechanism in THAs than in hip resurfacing procedures.
More Related Videos
08:19Protocol 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
09:08Biotribological Testing and Analysis of Articular Cartilage Sliding against Metal for Implants
Published on: May 14, 2020