Outcomes for cemented dual mobility cup to treat recurrent instability; A UK case series

Is There Safety Outside the "Safe Zone" in Total Hip Replacement? A Retrospective Observational Study

Background and Objectives: The safe zone in total hip replacement was introduced many years ago. Its aim was to provide guidelines for orthopedic surgeons in order to avoid complications such as instability. With the growing interest in spinopelvic alignment, some new insights suggest that the safe zone is an obsolete concept. This study aims to show that, even outside the safe zone, the effect of total hip replacement can be satisfactory. This could be used as preliminary study for an analysis of a larger group. Materials and Methods: Fifty-nine consecutive patients with end-stage osteoarthritis treated by total hip replacement were enrolled into the study and divided into two groups: inside the safe zone and outside the safe zone. A physical examination during postoperative visits was performed; the range of movement was measured using a goniometer; and the HHS and VAS were taken to measure functional outcomes and pain, respectively. An analysis of the radiological outcomes was performed. Results: There was no significant difference in regard to changes in total offset, pain, HHS and other complications. There were no signs of instability among patients during the follow-up. Conclusions: The results of this study show that the "safe zone" is a more complicated term that was previously thought. A proper soft tissue balance and spinopelvic alignment could be factors that change the "safe zone" for each patient and make it more individual.

Outcomes of Dual Mobility Bearings in Revision Total Hip Replacements

Background Dual mobility bearings have gained attention in the prevention of instability in revision total hip replacement. This study aimed to evaluate the use of dual mobility bearings in revision total hip replacement. The primary outcome was the rate of dislocation. Secondary outcomes included the rate of re-operation for any reason, surgical complications, serious medical adverse events, and 90-day mortality rate. Methods A single-centre case series of 55 consecutive operations in 49 patients who underwent revision total hip replacement using dual mobility bearings with a minimum follow-up of three months was studied.  Results Early dislocation occurred in one case (2%), and there were no intra-prosthetic dislocations at a mean follow-up of 16 months. The rate of re-operation for any reason was 6/55 (11%) cases, and the post-operative infection rate was 2/55 (4%) cases. Serious medical adverse events occurred in 2/55 (4%) cases. The 90-day mortality rate was 1/55 (2%) cases. Two cases (2%) had cup abduction or anteversion angles outside of the safe zones although there were no dislocations in these patients. Conclusion This case series demonstrates a low dislocation rate in the early post-operative period for dual mobility bearings in revision total hip replacement. Dual mobility bearings show promise as an early low dislocation implant in revision total hip replacement. It remains to be determined whether dual mobility bearings are low-wear implants in the long term.

Is Cemented Dual-Mobility Cup a Reliable Option in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Background: Instability is a common complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The dual mobility cup (DMC) allows a reduction in the dislocation rate. The goal of this systematic review was to clarify the different uses and outcomes according to the indications of the cemented DMC (C-DMC). Methods: A systematic review was performed using the keywords "Cemented Dual Mobility Cup" or "Cemented Tripolar Cup" without a publication year limit. Of the 465 studies identified, only 56 were eligible for the study. Results: The overall number of C-DMC was 3452 in 3426 patients. The mean follow-up was 45.9 months (range 12-98.4). In most of the cases (74.5%) C-DMC was used in a revision setting. In 57.5% DMC was cemented directly into the bone, in 39.6% into an acetabular reinforcement and in 3.2% into a pre-existing cup. The overall dislocation rate was 2.9%. The most frequent postoperative complications were periprosthetic infections (2%); aseptic loosening (1.1%) and mechanical failure (0.5%). The overall revision rate was 4.4%. The average survival rate of C-DMC at the last follow-up was 93.5%. Conclusions: C-DMC represents an effective treatment option to limit the risk of dislocations and complications for both primary and revision surgery. C-DMC has good clinical outcomes and a low complication rate.

A Meta-Analysis of the Incidence and Temporal Trends of Postoperative Dislocation in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Utilizing Constrained Acetabular Components or Dual Mobility Implants

BACKGROUND

The incidence of dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is reported to be up to 25% and remains a common source of failure. Constrained acetabular components and dual mobility implants are two implant classes being utilized to alleviate this burden in patients who have recurrent instability or major intraoperative instability. This meta-analysis evaluated the incidence and temporal trends of dislocation after implantation with constrained acetabular components and dual mobility implants in rTHA.

METHODS

Longitudinal studies reporting dislocation after the use of constrained acetabular components or dual mobility implants in rTHA were sought from Medline and Embase to October 2022. Secondary outcomes included re-revision surgery for dislocation and all causes. A total of 75 relevant citations were identified comprising 36 datasets of 3,784 constrained acetabular components and 47 datasets of 10,216 dual mobility implants.

RESULTS

For constrained acetabular components, the pooled incidence of dislocation was 9% (95% confidence interval: 7.2, 11.7) (range 0.0%-35.3%) over a weighted mean follow-up of 6 years, in contrast to 3% (95% confidence interval: 2.2, 4.4) (range 0.0%-21.4%) over 5 years for dual mobility implants. Re-revision rates for dislocation after using constrained acetabular components were around 9%, in contrast to 2% for dual mobility implants. Re-revision rates for all causes after using constrained acetabular components were around 19%, in contrast to 8% for dual mobility implants.

CONCLUSION

Dual mobility implants in the context of rTHA demonstrate lower incidences of dislocation (3% versus 9%), re-revision for dislocation (2% versus 9%), and rer-evision for any cause (8% versus 19%) in contrast to constrained acetabular components. This must be considered by surgeons when implanting such devices, often selected to treat instability.

Instability After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Dual Mobility Versus Jumbo Femoral Heads

BACKGROUND

The use of dual mobility (DM) articulations has grown substantially over the last decade to help minimize dislocation risk. The purpose of this study is to compare the results of DM articulations to jumbo femoral heads of equivalent sizes as they relate to postoperative dislocation.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed at a single institution between 2005 and 2018. DM articulations and large-diameter metal-on-metal femoral heads were included. Patients were followed with Harris Hip Scores and standard radiographs. Complications were prospectively recorded. Statistical analyses included chi-squared and Brown-Forsythe tests.

RESULTS

In total, 1,288 Magnum femoral head THAs and 365 Active Articulation DM THAs were included for analysis. The same monoblock cup was implanted via a posterior approach in all cases. Age, gender, body mass index, and diagnosis were similar between groups. Average follow-up in the DM group was 49 months, and 126 months in the jumbo head group. The average head sizes in the DM and jumbo head groups were 50 mm. There were no dislocations in the DM hips and only 2 (0.2%) in the jumbo femoral head group. Both groups had significant improvements in Harris Hip Score from their preoperative baseline.

CONCLUSION

Our study found similarly low dislocation rates in DM and jumbo femoral heads in primary THA. No evidence currently exists showing a benefit of the DM articulation beyond that of the large effective head size, and we recommend making every attempt at maximizing head size prior to using DM articulations.

Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The aims of this meta-analysis were to: (1) validate the outcome of modern dual mobility (DM) designs in patients who had undergone primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures and (2) to identify factors that affect the outcome.

Methods

We searched for studies that assessed the outcome of modern DM-THA in primary and revision procedures that were conducted between January, 2000 to August, 2020 on PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews and Embase. The pooled incidence of the most common failure modes and patient reported outcomes were evaluated in patients who have received: (1) primary THA, (2) revision THA for all causes or (3) for recurrent dislocation. A meta-regression analysis was performed for each parameter to determine the association with the outcome. The study design of each study was assessed for potential bias and flaws by using the quality assessment tool for case series studies.

Results

A total of 119 studies (N= 30016 DM-THAs) were included for analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 47.3 months. The overall implant failure rate was 4.2% (primary: 2.3%, revision for all causes: 5.5%, recurrent dislocation: 6.0%). The most common failure modes were aseptic loosening (primary: 0.9%, revision for all causes: 2.2%, recurrent dislocation: 2.4%), septic loosening (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes: 2.3%, recurrent dislocation: 2.5%), extra-articular dislocation (primary:0.6%, revision for all causes:1.3%, recurrent dislocation:2.5%), intra-prosthetic dislocation (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes:1.0%, recurrent dislocation:1.6%) and periprosthetic fracture (primary:0.9%, revision for all causes:0.9%, recurrent dislocation:1.3%). The multi-regression analysis identified younger age (β=-0.04, 95% CI -0.07 – -0.02) and female patients (β=3.34, 95% CI 0.91–5.78) were correlated with higher implant failure rate. Age, gender, posterolateral approach and body mass index (BMI) were not risk factors for extra-articular or intra-prosthetic dislocation in this cohort. The overall Harris hip score and Merle d’Aubigné score were 84.87 and 16.36, respectively. Level of evidence of this meta-analysis was IV.

Conclusion

Modern dual-mobility designs provide satisfactory mid-term implant survival and clinical performance. Younger age and female patients might impact the outcome after DM-THA. Future research directions should focus on, (1) long-term outcome of modern dual-mobility design, including specific concerns such as intra-prosthetic dislocation and elevated metal ion, and (2) cost-effectiveness analysis of dual-mobility implant as an alternative to conventional THA for patients who are at high risk of dislocation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04404-4.

Dual-Mobility Cup Total Hip Arthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Study With a Median Follow-Up of 5 Years

Introduction:

Patient outcomes following modern dual-mobility cup total hip arthroplasty (DM-THA) remains a concern. Few reports have focused on the use of modern DM-THA in the setting of Asian populations for displaced osteoporotic femoral neck fractures (FNFs). This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of Chinese population with displaced osteoporotic FNFs initially treated with modern DM-THA.

Materials and Methods:

Data from 112 consecutive patients (112 hips) with displaced osteoporotic FNFs initially treated with modern DM-THA during 2011-2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Follow-ups were performed at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and then every 1 year after surgery. The primary endpoint was the Harris Hip Score (HHS); the secondary endpoint was the main orthopedic complication rate.

Results:

The mean HHS improved from 58.62 (±15.79) prior to surgery to 86.13 (±9.92) at the final follow-up. The main complication rate was 14.2% (16/112). Sixteen complications in 10 patients were recorded. Of the 16 complications, there were 2 (1.7%) cases requiring revision DM-THA, 3 (2.6%) cases of loosening, 2 (1.7%) cases of migration, 3 (2.6%) intra-prosthetic dislocation (IPD), 4 (3.5%) cases of tilting, and 2 (1.7%) cases of severe wear. The need for revision was attributed to prosthesis loosening associated with poor bony quality.

Conclusion:

In patients with displaced osteoporotic FNFs, DM-THA may yield favorable functional outcomes and a low rate of main orthopedic complications, in particular, a low dislocation rate.