Question
Hi Sharon!. I'm a 49 year old male, who, in 1992, was shot in the right hip one night in a random act of violence by a shotgun and left for dead(not trying to be overdraumatic...just the way it was). The hospital staff told me I'd most likely never walk again, and if I DID, it'd never be the same. As stubborn as I am, after a LOT of pain and self rehabilitaion, I learned to walk without crutches or even a cane in less than a month...years later I even got to the point I could play volleyball. However....those days are gone. I now, on top of the 80 some lead pellets still in my hip, I've developed arthitis in both hips and my knees. You can actually hear my knees "crunch" if I try to stand from a crouched positon, and my right hip is getting worse by the day. Sometimes it takes me three days to mow my lawn with a self propelled mower, so all I have to do is simply walk behing it and not have to push. I can no longer(since the shotgun inncident) been able to cross my right leg over my left, and even when I go to bed, I find myself having to put a small pillow between my knees to keep my legs "straigh".
My personal phyisian has brought up to me several times hip replacement, and I've also thought of knee replacement, but I've heard horror stories about hip replacements...that some patients come out of it with one leg shorter than the other, and some stories or other people being able to move around somewhat unaided two days after the surgery, with no bad side effects.
I've gotten to the point now, of actually considering the hip replacement since the lack of mobility and the pain are causing VERY unwanted side effects, i.e. added weight gain due to living such an sendentary life(40+lbs in less than a year)which causes even MORE stress and pain on my hip.
What, in your opinion, would be the best option, considering what I've told you? I could live with my hip the way it is and be on painkillers the rest of my life, but that's not really a viable alternative...I'm far too "young" for that in my viewpoint!
Thank you for any insight you may be able to offer, as I'm totally lost and don't know which route may be best for me.

sincerely,
chuck correll

Answer
Dear Chuck

I"m sorry the first time I entered the wrong information and did not answer your question.

If I were you, I'd go for the replacements.  No questions asked.  I had my first set of hips put in at 16, and have had four revisions since then.  I essentially led a normal life.  I had two chidren, work a full time job and I am married.  I was never a big exerciser, so right now I swim and I ride a bike.  I have done "the step" aerobics, but I didn't like it.

My husband and I have gone on vacations and enjoyed a wonderful life.  (except we are always short on money like everyone else).  

In your case, I would say do the surgery. You will be out of pain, you will be able to work, you will essentially lead a normal life.  The replacements have improved many times over and most people can do light sports now.  Your doctor would have to direct you on that.  

As far as leg lengths, yes, some people have one leg shorter than another.  I have a three quarter leg discrepancy and I take care of that very easily by putting a lift in my shoe.  No one knows the difference.  Sometimes after multiple revisions, the leg length gets harder to adjust, but most people even, so called, normal people have a quarter to half inch discrepancy and don't even know it.

The other problem I had was loss of bone for each revision.   Hips last approximately 10-15 years and since I had mine done originally at 16, I have had four surgeries and since there is bone loss each time, due to the replacement wearing down bone, they had to use cadaver bone.  But it worked out fine.

I personally feel the knees is a harder operation than the hips.  I have heard that from people who have had both, but once it's done, they are so happy.  

I think you should be sure your orthopod is good, speak to some of his patients, and go for the surgery, you'll be glad you did.

Sharon Davis