Long-term would be the thing of concern for me. there are many
questions unanswered. just looking for as much info as i can.
I am not against re-surfacing and I am likely to have the procedure
anyway. I would love for the levels to be decreased. That's why i
was asking about the wright metal data, although it may not really be
that significant a drop.
one poster has just emailed me saying that they go back to background
levels after a few years. that's untrue. they supposedly decrease,
but not to background levels which are non-detectable levels.
--- In surfacehippy@
>
> Does the timespan at which these levels occur play a role in the
risk
> assessment (I would think longer is worse)? For example, the metal
> ion level is expected to drop considerably by the 2 yr mark...and
> reduce slightly from that time onward.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John(46)
> Gross R-Biomet 12Jul06
>
> --- In surfacehippy@
> <urbanguerrilla913@
> >
> > Just from the field I work in. I typically deal with human
exposure
> > to contaminants. Levels of chromium/cobalt in the 4-20 ppb range
(hi
> > range from Dr. Su - speaking about the Birmingham) would concern
me.
> > I have looked at some recent studies where the metals exposure
have
> > shown a reduction in cytotoxic T-cells (which fight viruses and
> > cancer - more studies ongoing). I've also looked at some swedish
> > studies which still raise a bit of a concern.
> >
> > Having levels of metals in your body at levels above 4-5 ppb
would
> > concern me a bit (at the higher range - which there are and have
been
> > upto 20 ppb I'd be very worried). At reduced ranges 2 ppb or
less, I
> > would be less concerned.
> >
> > So if the wright metal actually can reduce levels, I'd be
> > interested.
> >
> > --- In surfacehippy@
> > >
> > > I'd like to ask WHY you are concerned about metal ions?
> > >
> > > Decades worth of data regarding the use of CoCrMo alloys show no
> > > correlation between metal ions and health issues.
> > >
> > > You may want to orient your analysis more towards factors where
> > there
> > > is a demonstrated correlation (e.g. surgeon experience..
> > >
> > > John(46)
> > > Gross R-Biomet 12Jul06
> > >
> > > --- In surfacehippy@
> > > <urbanguerrilla913@
> > > >
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > I'm new to the forum but am thinking of going forward with
> > > > resurfacing but am very concerned about the metal ions. Can
you
> > > > forward or post the info/table/data you are looking at in
> > comparing
> > > > the the BHR vs the conserve plus? or atleast a link?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > --- In surfacehippy@
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Jerry,
> > > > >
> > > > > I remembered seeing those charts but didn't remember where!
I
> > went
> > > > > back and found them in my email.
> > > > >
> > > > > The data is interesting. It does suggest that the
differential
> > > > > hardness principle used in Wright's Class A concept, has
some
> > > > merit.
> > > > >
> > > > > I noticed that the surface roughness of the BHR they used
in the
> > > > > testing was twice as high (twice as rough) as the Conserve
> > devices
> > > > > (both heat-treated and as-cast)....
all
> > BHR
> > > > > and all Conserve+ parts I wonder?....if so, it suggests
that
> > Wright
> > > > > Medical Technologies possess better polishing capabilities
than
> > > > > Smith and Nephew (twice as good in fact - a very significant
> > > > > difference IMO).....
> > > > >
> > > > > I know I posted when I first heard about the class A (~8
months
> > > > ago)
> > > > > that I wondered whether this differential-
principle is
> > > > > something that the other manufacturers would follow. I'm
still
> > > > > wondering because it seems to be a relatively simple thing
to
> > > > > incorporate (from a manufacturing perspective) and seems to
have
> > > > > some measurable value.......
> > > > > patentable..
do
> > more
> > > > > than a very minor amount of heat-treating (if any) on the
> > > > acetabular
> > > > > cup.
> > > > >
> > > > > Another interesting point I picked up after re-re-reviewing
> > > > McMinn's
> > > > > presentation where he talks about the wear between as-cast
vs
> > heat-
> > > > > treated parts: he compares the combination of [AC Cap
against AC
> > > > > cup] against [HT Cap against HT cup]; where the AC/AC combo
is
> > much
> > > > > much better than the HT/HT combo. But what he ignores
> > altogether,
> > > > > is the combo of AC/HT.....which shows the least amount of
wear
> > of
> > > > > all the combos tested. And these results are consistent
with
> > what
> > > > > WMT is claiming with their Class-A material.
> > > > >
> > > > > But having stroked WMT so highly, I will add that the
> > difference in
> > > > > wear-rates occurs for about the first million cycles or so
in
> > their
> > > > > simulator tests. Beyond that, the lines are parallel which
means
> > > > > the wear-rates become about the same. I'm not sure what 1
> > million
> > > > > cycles translates to into average human time (my guess is 6
> > months
> > > > > to 2 yrs?).......
> > their
> > > > > hip for over 6 months to 2 years, will have a similar metal
ion
> > > > level
> > > > > in their bloodstream as someone with a Conserve + Class A
after
> > > > just
> > > > > a couple of months or so ("roundabouts"
> > have
> > > > > been pee'd away by then!
> > > > >
> > > > > The reduction in wear-rate seems directionally correct with
the
> > > > > Class-A material. But people need to understand that it's a
> > > > > relatively short-term phenomenon; and doesn't continue
> > > > > indefinitely. Still, a step forward IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > For what that's worth?
> > > > >
> > > > > John(46)
> > > > > Gross R-Biomet 12Jul06
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In surfacehippy@
> > > > > <jerry.rosette@
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you check thru the attachments I e-mailed to you a
while
> > back
> > > > if
> > > > > > should answer your question regarding the comparison to
BHR
> > and
> > > > C+
> > > > > A
> > > > > > Class.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jerry
> > > > > > --- In surfacehippy@
wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The WMT "Class A Conserve +" shows marked reductions in
ion
> > > > level
> > > > > > > release as compared to it's predecessor "Conserve +".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But has anyone seen any data to compare the WMT charts
in
> > the
> > > > > files
> > > > > > > section (which Keith refers to below) against the metal
ion
> > > > > release
> > > > > > > levels of BHR and/or Biomet for example?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From the ion-release perspective, this seems worth
> > comparing?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > John(46)
> > > > > > > Gross R-Biomet 12Jul06
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In surfacehippy@
> > kbrews@
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In the files section, in the Implants folder, is a
file
> > with
> > > > a
> > > > > > > description
> > > > > > > > of the A-CLASS metal system.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If it has not yet been applied to the Conserve Plus,
it
> > may
> > > > be
> > > > > due
> > > > > > > to trying
> > > > > > > > to get the original C+ approved by the FDA.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Keith
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: surfacehippy@
> > > > > > > [mailto:surfacehippy@
> > > > > > > > Behalf Of jon44
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:54 AM
> > > > > > > > To: surfacehippy@
> > > > > > > > Subject: [surfacehippy] Wright A-CLASS(TM) Advanced
> > Metal ??
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Could anyone explain to me what the deal is with this-
-
> > there
> > > > > was a
> > > > > > > > press release 2 years ago saying they had compared it
with
> > > > > > > > their "Conserve Plus" resurfacing and it had 2/3 less
> > metal
> > > > > ions.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A related issue is if they use this metal alloy for a
> > THR,
> > > > why
> > > > > > > can't it
> > > > > > > > be used for resurfacing, assuming both systems have
the
> > same
> > > > > size
> > > > > > > head,
> > > > > > > > etc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jon
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar