Evaluation of Mechanically-Assisted Crevice Corrosion of Different Modular Dual Mobility Constructs

Fretting and Tribocorrosion of Modular Dual Mobility Liners: Role of Design, Microstructure, and Malseating

BACKGROUND

Modular dual mobility (DM) bearings have a junction between a cobalt chrome alloy (CoCrMo) liner and titanium shell, and the risk of tribocorrosion at this interface remains a concern. The purpose of this study was to determine whether liner malseating and liner designs are associated with taper tribocorrosion.

METHODS

We evaluated 28 retrieved modular DM implants with a mean in situ duration of 14.6 months (range, 1 to 83). There were 2 manufacturers included (12 and 16 liners, respectively). Liners were considered malseated if a distinct divergence between the liner and shell was present on postoperative radiographs. Tribocorrosion was analyzed qualitatively with the modified Goldberg Score and quantitatively with an optical coordinate-measuring machine. An acetabular shell per manufacturer was sectioned for metallographic analysis.

RESULTS

There were 6 implants (22%) that had severe grade 4 corrosion, 6 (22%) had moderate grade 3, 11 (41%) had mild grade 2, and 5 (18.5%) had grade 1 or no visible corrosion. The average volumetric material loss at the taper was 0.086 ± 0.19 mm3. There were 7 liners (25%) that had radiographic evidence of malseating, and all were of a single design (P = .01). The 2 liner designs were fundamentally different from one another with respect to the cobalt chrome alloy type, taper surface finish, and shape deviations. Malseating was an independent risk factor for increased volumetric material loss (P = .017).

CONCLUSIONS

DM tribocorrosion with quantifiable material loss occurred more commonly in malseated liners. Specific design characteristics may make liners more prone to malseating, and the interplay between seating mechanics, liner characteristics, and patient factors likely contributes to the shell/liner tribocorrosion environment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Two-Year Outcomes of Novel Dual-Mobility Implant in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Introduction

Dual-mobility (DM) implants for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have gained popularity due to their potential to reduce hip instability and dislocation events that may lead to revision surgery. These implants consist of a femoral head articulated within a polyethylene liner, which articulates within an outer acetabular shell, creating a dual-bearing surface. Our study aimed to report our observations on the survivorship of a novel DM implant for primary total hip arthroplasty at two years.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study to assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing a THA with a novel DM implant (OR3O acetabular system™, Smith & Nephew, Inc., Memphis, TN) from January 2020 to September 2021. Patient demographics, surgical information, and survivorship data were collected from medical records for patients with a minimum of two years of follow-up. Primary outcomes included overall implant survivorship at two years as well as aseptic survivorship, revision rates of the DM acetabular shell, and average time to revision. Patient-reported outcomes were collected in the form of HOOS JR.

Results

A total of 250 hips in 245 patients had a minimum two-year follow-up. Primary osteoarthritis (80%) was the most common indication for index THA. The average aseptic survivorship of the DM acetabular components at two years for the cohort was 98.4% and survivorship of the acetabular implants overall was 97.6%. There were a total of four (1.6%) aseptic revisions of the DM acetabular component. Reasons for aseptic acetabular revision included one case of instability, one intraprosthetic dislocation, one periprosthetic acetabular fracture, and one malpositioned acetabular cup resulting in impingement. The mean time of follow-up was 893.9 days. Eighty-seven patients had preoperative and two-year HOOS JR available. HOOS JR improved by an average of 38.5 points.

Conclusion

This novel DM acetabular implant demonstrates excellent survivorship at two years follow-up with low rates of instability and intraprosthetic dislocation and no episodes of metal-on-metal corrosion. Use of the DM implant demonstrated clinically relevant improvements in patient-reported outcomes at two years.