My "bilateral" dilemma
Whereas many things are clear-cut regarding hip surgery, the choice of whether or not to get "both hips" done at the same time is not an easy one when one hip is bone-to-bone (such as my right) and the other has only a precious sliver of cartilage remaining (such as my left). Approximately 12% of patients go the "bilateral" route, and there are some advantages to doing all the recuperating at one time rather than repeating the same process a year or two down the road. My local OS at Crozer-Chester Hospital, who only does THR's, suggested I consider get ting them both done together. Dr. Bose said that he's seen patients improve with their "slightly better hip" after getting their "bone-on-bone" hip resurfaced, and prefers "conservative measures" as long as there is cartilage remaining. The fact that I have significantly more trouble putting socks and shoes on my good hip has worried me, as well as occasional spikes of pain that I use to, but for some reason no longer, feel in my "worse" hip. However, several members of the surface hippy group have reported substantial improvement in their "so-so" hip after surgery on the "too late" hip. Dr. Bose said in an email reply that he can't give me any precise probabilities regarding my left hip, but that surgery on my right side could result in some pelvic adjustment that could lessen the stiffness and pain in my left hip. He also said that some patients insist on bilateral, and that he complies in most situations. My thought is I might not mind another trip to India in a few years (good excuse to go!), and if I can wait longer, I think the odds are greater that I will be able to receive insurance coverage, especially given the recent FDA approval of the BHR device. I just don't think my left hip is going to miraculously improve, but perhaps I can delay its further deterioration by running less and biking and swimming more.
posted by Gary Klein @ 3:37 PM
2 comments
