Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39695440›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

The potential carcinogenicity of orthopaedic implants - a scoping review.

Cherry W Y Sun, Lawrence C M Lau, Jason P Y Cheung, Siu-Wai Choi

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. Knee arthroplasty failure is associated with significant systemic multimetal exposure.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Cherry W Y SunDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Lawrence C M LauDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Jason P Y CheungDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Siu-Wai ChoiDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. htswchoi@hku.hk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvery year, hundreds of thousands of patients receive an orthopaedic or dental implant containing metals such as cobalt, chromium and titanium. Since the European Chemicals Agency (2020) classified pure cobalt metal as a Category 1B carcinogen, manufacturers of products containing ≥ 0.1% of this metal must perform a risk assessment and justify that there are no viable alternatives. The up-classification of cobalt metal to a carcinogen without good evidence that its use in implants is carcinogenic may cause unnecessary concern to the many patients who have, or may require such implants. Although in vitro and animal studies have shown such metals to be carcinogenic, human epidemiological studies have not been definitive. In addition, although many advances have been made in the past few decades with regard to the materials used in implant metals, no recent review of their carcinogenic effects have been published.

methodsThis scoping review aims to summarise epidemiological studies conducted in recent years (from 2010 to present) to outline the carcinogenic effects of orthopaedic metal implants that have been published. This encompasses implants of different materials and surfaces, including metal, polyethylene and ceramic orthopaedic implants, cemented and cementless joint replacement surgeries, and surgical techniques such as resurfacing and total joint replacements that are currently in use and the potential carcinogenicity related to their use. Research papers with various study designs published in the English language were included. Studies were excluded if participants had a prior history of cancer before receiving orthopaedic implants and if they focused solely on the carcinogenicity of metals or materials not related to orthopaedic implants.

resultsA total of 16 studies, encompassing over 700,000 implant patients, were identified through PubMed and have been included in this review. In long term follow-up of up to 17.9 years, no increased risk of all-site cancer was seen in these patients. However, an increase in site-specific cancers, namely prostate, melanoma and haematological cancers have been identified. Specifically, an increase in prostate cancer was identified in three studies.

conclusionBased on the summarised evidence, there is no consistent evidence to show that patients with any type of orthopaedic implant has an increased risk of cancer, although slight (non-statistically significant) increases in prostate cancer was observed and this, in particular, deserves longer-term surveillance.

Indexed as

CarcinogensProstheses and ImplantsAnimalsCobaltHumansNeoplasmsRisk AssessmentTitaniumCarcinogensCobaltTitaniumCarcinogenicityImplant metalsMalignancyOrthopaedic implants

Identifiers

PMID39695440
PMCPMC11656979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.