Histological features of pseudotumor-like tissues from metal-on-metal hips

Pat Campbell, Edward Ebramzadeh, Scott Nelson, Karren Takamura, Koen De Smet, Harlan C Amstutz, Pat Campbell, Edward Ebramzadeh, Scott Nelson, Karren Takamura, Koen De Smet, Harlan C Amstutz

Abstract

Background: Pseudotumor-like periprosthetic tissue reactions around metal-on-metal (M-M) hip replacements can cause pain and lead to revision surgery. The cause of these reactions is not well understood but could be due to excessive wear, or metal hypersensitivity or an as-yet unknown cause. The tissue features may help distinguish reactions to high wear from those with suspected metal hypersensitivity.

Questions/purposes: We therefore examined the synovial lining integrity, inflammatory cell infiltrates, tissue organization, necrosis and metal wear particles of pseudotumor-like tissues from M-M hips revised for suspected high wear related and suspected metal hypersensitivity causes.

Methods: Tissue samples from 32 revised hip replacements with pseudotumor-like reactions were studied. A 10-point histological score was used to rank the degree of aseptic lymphocytic vasculitis-associated lesions (ALVAL) by examination of synovial lining integrity, inflammatory cell infiltrates, and tissue organization. Lymphocytes, macrophages, plasma cells, giant cells, necrosis and metal wear particles were semiquantitatively rated. Implant wear was measured with a coordinate measuring machine. The cases were divided into those suspected of having high wear and those suspected of having metal hypersensitivity based on clinical, radiographic and retrieval findings. The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the histological features in these two groups.

Results: The tissues from patients revised for suspected high wear had a lower ALVAL score, fewer lymphocytes, but more macrophages and metal particles than those tissues from hips revised for pain and suspected metal hypersensitivity. The highest ALVAL scores occurred in patients who were revised for pain and suspected metal hypersensitivity. Component wear was lower in that group.

Conclusions: Pseudotumor-like reactions can be caused by high wear, but may also occur around implants with low wear, likely because of a metal hypersensitivity reaction. Histologic features including synovial integrity, inflammatory cell infiltrates, tissue organization, and metal particles may help differentiate these causes.

Clinical relevance: Painful hips with periprosthetic masses may be caused by high wear, but if this can be ruled out, metal hypersensitivity should be considered.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
An enlarged fluid-filled bursa excised from the hip of a male patient during revision surgery for acetabular malpositioning 13 months after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is shown. There is light gray discoloration and the wear measurement of the explanted component showed an annual femoral wear rate of 12.8 μm.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Light micrograph showing typical histologic features of high wear cases, including organized fibrin (F), a diffuse, extensive infiltration of slate blue/gray macrophages, and a small aggregate of lymphocytes (arrows) (Stain, hematoxylin and eosin, original magnification ×40). This received an ALVAL score of 5 (2 for synovial lining, 2 for inflammatory infiltrate, and 1 for tissue organization).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Light micrograph showing typical histologic features of cases revised for suspected metal sensitivity, including a thick, mostly acellular tidemark area lined by fibrin (F) and thick, dense aggregates of lymphocytes at the rear of the tissue (arrows) (Stain, hematoxylin and eosin, original magnification ×40). This received an ALVAL score of 10 (3 for synovial lining, 4 for inflammatory infiltrate, and 3 for tissue organization).
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Light micrograph showing dense lymphocyte aggregates behind a thick necrotic fibrous tissue layer. The tissues were from a male patient with a THA that was revised for pain after 2 years. Extensive necrosis was found at revision, but the component wear was within normal range (Stain, hematoxylin and eosin, original magnification ×40).

References

    1. Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ. Background of metal-on-metal resurfacing. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 2006;220:85–94.
    1. Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ. Eleven years of experience with metal-on-metal hybrid hip resurfacing: A review of 1000 conserve plus. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:36–43. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.04.017.
    1. Aroukatos P, Repanti M, Repantis T, Bravou V, Korovessis P. Immunologic adverse reaction associated with low-carbide metal-on-metal bearings in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 December 18. [Epub ahead of print].
    1. Boardman DR, Middleton FR, Kavanagh TG. A benign psoas mass following metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:402–404. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B3.16748.
    1. Bozic KJ, Kurtz S, Lau E, Ong K, Chiu V, Vail TP, Rubash HE, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of bearing surface usage in total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg. 2009;91:1614–1620. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.01220.
    1. Campbell P, Beaule P, Ebramzadeh E, Le Duff M, De Smet K, Lu Z, Amstutz H. A study of implant failure in metal-on-metal surface arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:35–46. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000238777.34939.82.
    1. Campbell P, Shimmin A, Walter L, Solomon M. Metal sensitivity as a cause of groin pain in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:1080–1085. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.09.024.
    1. Clayton RA, Beggs I, Salter DM, Grant MH, Patton JT, Porter DE. Inflammatory pseudotumor associated with femoral nerve palsy following metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1988–1993. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.00879.
    1. De Haan R, Campbell PA, Su EP, De Smet KA. Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: The influence of malposition of the components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1158–1163. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B9.19891.
    1. De Haan R, Pattyn C, Gill HS, Murray DW, Campbell PA, De Smet K. Correlation between inclination of the acetabular component and metal ion levels in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1291–1297. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B10.20533.
    1. Doorn PF, Mirra JM, Campbell PA, Amstutz HC. Tissue reaction to metal on metal total hip prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;329(Suppl):S187–205. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199608001-00017.
    1. Graves S. National joint replacement registry annual report 2009. AOA National Joint Replacement Registry Web site. Available at: . Accessed Septemper 1, 2009.
    1. Gruber FW, Bock A, Trattnig S, Lintner F, Ritschl P. Cystic lesion of the groin due to metallosis: A rare long-term complication of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:923–927. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.10.002.
    1. Hart AJ, Sabah S, Henckel J, Lewis A, Cobb J, Sampson B, Mitchell A, Skinner JA. The painful metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:738–744. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B6.21682.
    1. Harvie P, Giele H, Fang C, Ansorge O, Ostlere S, Gibbons M, Whitwell D. The treatment of femoral neuropathy due to pseudotumour caused by metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty. Hip Int. 2008;18:313–320.
    1. Howie DW, Cain CM, Cornish BL. Pseudo-abscess of the psoas bursa in failed double-cup arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;73:29–32.
    1. Isaac GH, Siebel T, Schmalzried TP, Cobb AG, O’Sullivan T, Oakeshott RD, Flett M, Vail TP. Development rationale for an articular surface replacement: A science-based evolution. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H]. 2006;220:253–268.
    1. Kabo JM, Gebhard JS, Loren G, Amstutz HC. In vivo wear of polyethylene acetabular components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75:254–258.
    1. Khan M, Kuiper JH, Edwards D, Robinson E, Richardson JB. Birmingham hip arthroplasty: five to eight years of prospective multicenter results. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:1044–1050. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.07.016.
    1. Kwon YM, Glyn-Jones S, Simpson DJ, Kamali A, McLardy-Smith P, Gill HS, Murray DW. Analysis of wear of retrieved metal-on-metal hip resurfacing implants revised due to pseudotumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:356–361. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B3.23281.
    1. Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Hallab NJ, Natu S, Nargol AV. Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: A consequence of excess wear. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:38–46. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B1.22770.
    1. Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Webb J, Nargol AV. The effect of component size and orientation on the concentrations of metal ions after resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1143–1151.
    1. Langton DJ, Sprowson AP, Joyce TJ, Reed M, Carluke I, Partington P, Nargol AV. Blood metal ion concentrations after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: A comparative study of articular surface replacement and Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:1287–1295. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B10.22308.
    1. Leigh W, O’Grady P, Lawson EM, Hung NA, Theis JC, Matheson J. Pelvic pseudotumor: An unusual presentation of an extra-articular granuloma in a well-fixed total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:934–938. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.08.003.
    1. Mabilleau G, Kwon YM, Pandit H, Murray DW, Sabokbar A. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty: A review of periprosthetic biological reactions. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:734–747. doi: 10.1080/17453670810016795.
    1. Mahendra G, Pandit H, Kliskey K, Murray D, Gill HS, Athanasou N. Necrotic and inflammatory changes in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop. 2009;80:653–659. doi: 10.3109/17453670903473016.
    1. Malviya A, Holland JP. Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: 10-year Newcastle experience. Acta Orthop Belg. 2009;75:477–483.
    1. McMinn D, Daniel J. History and modern concepts in surface replacement. Proc Inst Mech Eng. J. Eng. Med. [H]. 2006;220:239–251. doi: 10.1243/095441105X68944.
    1. Ollivere B, Darrah C, Barker T, Nolan J, Porteous MJ. Early clinical failure of the Birmingham metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is associated with metallosis and soft-tissue necrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91:1025–1030. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B8.21701.
    1. Pandit H, Glyn-Jones S, McLardy-Smith P, Gundle R, Whitwell D, Gibbons CL, Ostlere S, Athanasou N, Gill HS, Murray DW. Pseudotumours associated with metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:847–851. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B7.20213.
    1. Pandit H, Vlychou M, Whitwell D, Crook D, Luqmani R, Ostlere S, Murray DW, Athanasou NA. Necrotic granulomatous pseudotumours in bilateral resurfacing hip arthoplasties: Evidence for a type iv immune response. Virchows Arch. 2008;453:529–534. doi: 10.1007/s00428-008-0659-9.
    1. Rieker CB, Schon R, Konrad R, Liebentritt G, Gnepf P, Shen M, Roberts P, Grigoris P. Influence of the clearance on in-vitro tribology of large diameter metal-on-metal articulations pertaining to resurfacing hip implants. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:135–142. doi: 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.004.
    1. Sarmiento A, Ebramzadeh E, Gogan WJ, McKellop HA. Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:996–1002.
    1. Shimmin A, Beaule PE, Campbell P. Current concept review. Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:637–654. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01012.
    1. Wan Z, Malik A, Jaramaz B, Chao L, Dorr LD. Imaging and navigation measurement of acetabular component position in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:32–42. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0597-5.
    1. Weber BG. Experience with the Metasul total hip bearing system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;329(Suppl):S69–77. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199608001-00007.
    1. Willert H-G, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A, Flury R, Windler M, Koster G, Lohmann CH. Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:28–36. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.A.02039pp.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren