So now I just have to wait and hope that the CD worked for the right hip. That means I have time to start thinking about the left hip. I've seen a few doctors so far about this hip, and they all say that it's too far gone for anything but a total hip replacement (THR). There is a new surgery that has only been approved by the FDA for about eight years, but that's been around for longer in Europe, called hip resurfacing. Resurfacing essentially accomplishes the same task as replacement--putting in fake parts to replace the original worn-out ones-but it leaves more of the original parts in. Basically they just take the worn-out top of the bone off and put a metal cap on it, and then put in a metal piece on the other side too. There's a general rule that people can have two THR's in a lifetime, but a resurfacing still leaves enough bone for two THRs. In other words--if I get a THR now and it wears out in 20 years, I'll have my second (probably last) hip replacement at about age 57. If I get the resurfacing now and it wears out in 20 years, I'll still have two THRs left at the same age--making it more likely that I'll be able to remain active into old age.
I think if I decide to choose the resurfacing, I'll go back to Dr. Mont in Baltimore, as he has plenty of experience with these. The doctor here said a few negative things about resurfacing--that it's riskier, that the operation and recovery are longer and harder, etc. According to Dr. Mont, the risk of complications is small, and if they have a problem they can easily convert it to a THR, and the recovery is the same. Patients generally have a better range of motion and less limp with resurfacing than with a THR.
Negatives are that we'd have to go up to Baltimore again, and there are increased metal ions in the blood. This may have negative outcomes for future childbirth-only a few babies have been born to women with resurfaced hips so evidence is lacking. None of the babies born so far have had problems, although I think there have only been nine or so.
Let me know if you have any opinions-I like to think about all sides of a decision before I make up my mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
As a former Femur patient, I gotta tell you the whole thing makes me a little light headed!! With that said, I think the resurfacing sounds like the better deal. Keep as much of the original surface that you can. By the time you need it resurfaced again, they may have some new procedure (only patients with resurfacing qualify!). I feel justified in my suggestions to you Meg, you see, I just had my brakes resurfaced instead of the invasive brake replacement!! Feel good, my friend. dave
I'm glad to hear there are options for you. I think going with Dr. Mont is a great idea since he has already been so willing to work with you. Maybe next time you can plan to stay in Baltimore a little longer for recovery. I'm not sure which option is best. I just want you to get your quality of life back and keep it for many decades to come!!!
Love,
Janna
Post a Comment