Dual-mobility bearings for patients with abductor-trochanteric complex insufficiency

A geometric assessment method for estimating dimensional change of retrieved dual mobility liners for total hip arthroplasty

Despite their emerging use, the current understanding of the in-vivo functional mechanisms of Dual Mobility (DM) Total Hip Replacements (THRs) is poor, and current characterisation methodologies are not suitable for the unique function and design of these types of devices. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a geometric characterisation methodology to estimate dimensional change across the articulating surfaces of retrieved DM polyethylene liners so that their invivo function may be better understood. The method involves the acquisition of three-dimensional coordinate data from the internal and external surfaces of DM liners. The data is processed using a bespoke MATLAB script which approximates the unworn reference geometry of each surface, calculates geometric variance at each point and produces surface deviation heatmaps so that areas of wear and/or deformation may be visualised across the implant. One as-manufactured and five retrieved DM liners were assessed, which demonstrated the efficacy, repeatability and sensitivity of the developed method. This study describes an automated and non-destructive approach for assessing retrieved DM liners of any size and from any manufacturer, which may be used in future research to improve our understanding of their in-vivo function and failure mechanisms.

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.

Dual-Mobility Implants and Constrained Liners in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability remains the most common complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in aseptic revision rates and survivorship between dual-mobility (DM) and constrained liners (CL) in revision THA.

METHODS

We reviewed a consecutive series of 2432 revision THA patients from 2008 to 2019 at our institution and identified all patients who received either a CL or DM bearing. We compared demographics, comorbidities, indications, dislocations, and aseptic failure rates between the two groups. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to determine risk factors for failure, and a Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with an aseptic re-revision as the endpoint.

RESULTS

Of the 191 patients, 139 (72%) received a DM bearing, and 52 (28%) had a CL. At a mean follow-up of 14.3 months, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of dislocation (10.4% vs 14.0%, P = .667), aseptic revision (30.9% vs 46.2%, P = .073), or time to revision (3.78 vs 6 months, P = .565) between the two groups. The multivariate analysis revealed CL had no difference in aseptic re-revision rates when compared with DM (odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.52, P = .177). The survivorship analysis found no difference in aseptic failure between the groups at 12 months (P = .059).

CONCLUSION

Both CL and DM bearings have high aseptic failure rates at intermediate term follow-up after revision THA. CL did show a higher risk of failure than DM bearings, but it was not statistically significant with the numbers available for this study. Further prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment for recurrent instability.

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 for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis

INTRODUCTION

Revision THA (R-THA) is thought to have a higher complication rate if compared to primary THA. Dual Mobility (DM) implants have been designed aiming for achieving greater stability, with good clinical results. However, scarce material can be found about the real improvements provided by this type of implant compared to traditional implant in Revisions of Total Hip Arthroplasties.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies were performed in December 2019. This was in accordance with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Our primary outcome measure was overall survivorship and dislocation rate, either treated with a conservative method or requiring surgery.

RESULTS

Regarding the overall implant survival, we found a slight significant risk ratio, with a statistically meaningful difference between the two groups in questions in favour of the DM implant. A statistically significant difference in favour of the DM group turned out considering only the Dislocation rate Risk ratio and the aseptic loosening risk as well. No statistical difference was found between the two groups about the risk ratio of infection.

DISCUSSION

A steady increase of evidence is demonstrating the efficacy of using a DM cup system in THA revisions with low dislocation rates, but currently there is no study in the literature that demonstrates with statistically significant evidence. The main finding of the present study is that implant's Survivor and prevention of dislocation at medium follow-up showed better results with a DM if compared to a fixed-bearing cup, for Revision THA.

The Patient With Chronic Total Hip Arthroplasty Dislocations: A Case Series of Five Patients Who Underwent Revision THA Using Polypropylene Mesh for Capsular Reconstruction

We report a case series of 5 patients who underwent revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a polypropylene mesh for capsular reconstruction for chronic THA instability. The average follow-up is 16.6 months (range, 9-20 months). There were no postoperative dislocations in our series. Three patients had previous infections with two-stage revisions before final revision surgery and were infection free at their most recent follow-up. One patient developed a prosthetic joint infection 2 months postoperatively. The use of a polypropylene mesh appears to be another tool that surgeons can use when dealing with the difficult dilemma on how to treat the patient with chronic THA instability and severe abductor and capsular tissue loss.

Use of dual mobility components in total hip arthroplasty: Indications and outcomes

Instability after total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be a problematic complication and remains one of the leading causes of revision surgery in the early post-operative period. Dual mobility (DM) implants decrease dislocation risk after THA but they come with their own set of complications. Selective use of DM implants for THA in high risk groups can confer the advantages of this construct while mitigating the risks. In this paper, we review the current literature to examine the evidence for or against use of DM implants in various clinical scenarios and provide an algorithm for when to consider using DM design construct in THA.

Absence of instabilities and intra-prosthetic dislocations at 7 to 11 years following THA using a fourth-generation cementless dual mobility acetabular cup

PURPOSE

Dual-mobility (DM) cups are increasingly used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) but there lacks literature on their long-term results. We aimed to investigate outcomes of a fourth-generation cementless DM acetabular cup at 7-11 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 240 consecutive hips that received cementless THA using the same dual mobility cup (Novae Sunfit TH) and femoral stem (Corail). Patients were recalled at ≥7 years to collect Oxford hip scores (OHS), Harris hip scores (HHS), and inspect for radiolucent lines and granulomas. Multi-variable analyses were performed to determine whether HHS or OHS were associated with pre- or intra-operative variables.

RESULTS

At 8.4 ± 0.8 years (range, 7-11), 6 hips were revised (2.5%), 54 deceased (22.5%), and 14 could not be reached (5.8%). Four revisions (2 cup+stem, 2 liners only) were due to sepsis (1.7%), one (cup and stem) for trauma (0.4%), and one (stem) due to aseptic loosening (0.4%). For the remaining 166 hips, HHS was 83.6 ± 13.2 and OHS was 20.3 ± 6.7. Multi-variable analysis confirmed that HHS (β = - 0.38; p = 0.039) and OHS (β = 0.36; p < 0.001) worsened with age, and that OHS was worse for Charnley C patients (β = 3.17; p = 0.009). Neither granulomas nor radiolucenies were observed around any cups, but radiolucenies were seen around 25 stems (20.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

This fourth-generation DM cup demonstrated satisfactory outcomes at 7-11 years, with no instabilities or cup revisions due to aseptic loosening. Better OHS was observed for younger patients and those presenting higher Charnley grade.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case study.

Surgical repair for abductor lesion after revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Abductor mechanism lesions represent a severe complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The resulting abductor insufficiency can cause limping, pain, instability, and a higher rate of failure, thus requiring further revision surgery. In case of severe degeneration and retraction of the abductor mechanism, several different surgical treatments are needed.

AIM

To systematically review all studies reporting on surgical treatment of severe abductor lesion after rTHA, focusing on surgical techniques, and clinical and functional results.

METHOD

Scientific databases were accessed in December 2018 to identify studies addressing the surgical management of severe abductor disruption after rTHA. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Data were extracted from the identified articles and summarised. Only data about patients with symptoms of abductor insufficiency after rTHA were included in the database.

RESULTS

9 retrospective studies were included, all being retrospective case series reporting on a total of 92 patients. Several surgical strategies have been described and performed: a repair using a synthetic mesh was reported in 1 study; 2 studies reported on local muscle transfer (gluteus maximus transfer or advancement); vastus lateralis advancement was described in 4 studies while in 2 studies the injury was repaired with the use of an allograft. Overall positive results have been reported in terms of pain reduction, while poor to mild functional scores with persistent limping have often been observed in the postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

The short follow-up time of the reviewed studies is inadequate to uncover any late dislocation, implant failure or different complications related to abductor mechanism reconstruction.

Mid-Term Survivorship of a Novel Constrained Acetabular Device

BACKGROUND

Recurrent instability after total hip arthroplasty is a difficult complication. In certain cases, a constrained acetabular device is needed to address these issues. The purpose of this study is to report the midterm outcomes and survivorship of a single novel constrained liner device.

METHODS

A retrospective review as performed on all procedures (except first stage exchange for infection) in which a Freedom Constrained (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) liner was used between December 2003 and November 2016. Patients with 2-year minimum follow-up or failure were included, yielding a cohort of 177 patients. Procedures were 130 aseptic revisions, 40 reimplantations following infection eradication, and 7 complex primaries. The constrained mechanism was implanted in 46 hips (26%) to treat active instability and 131 hips (74%) for increased risk of instability and intraoperative instability. Patients had on average 3.4 previous surgeries.

RESULTS

With an average 7.1-year follow-up, 11 hips dislocated (6.2%), and 13 hips (7.3%) were revised for acetabular aseptic loosening, resulting in an overall constrained aseptic or mechanical failure rate of 13.6%. Nineteen hips (10.7%) failed from infection with 58% of these having had a previous infection. Patients with active instability had significantly higher failure for dislocation than patients who were at risk (15.2% vs 3%, P = .01). All-cause survival rate at 7 years was 74.8%, aseptic survival was 83.6%, and survival for instability was 91.8%.

CONCLUSION

Revision for instability remains challenging as many patients have had numerous previous surgeries and at-risk anatomy. Constrained inserts are one option to manage instability, but a high rate of recurrence can still occur.

Dual Mobility Cups in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Efficient Strategy to Decrease Dislocation Risk

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is a challenging surgery with a higher rate of complications than primary arthroplasty, particularly instability and aseptic loosening. The purpose of this study is to compare dual mobility cup (DMC) and standard mobility cup (SMC) in all rTHAs performed at our institution over a decade with a 1 year minimum follow-up.

METHODS

Two hundred ninety-five rTHAs (acetabular only and bipolar revisions) between 2006 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. These were divided into those with a DMC (184 revisions) or SMC (111 revisions). Dislocation and complications requiring re-revision were reported.

RESULTS

The rTHA mean age was 69 years ± 13.9 (19-92) and the mean follow-up was 2.3 years. Dislocation risk was statistically lower (P = .01) with a DMC (3.8%; 7/184) than with an SMC (13.5%; 15/111). DMC required re-rTHA in 24/184 (13%) for any reason compared to SMC in 19/111 (17.1%) (P = .34). There was no significant difference in early aseptic loosening (P = .28) between the 2 groups. For young patients (≤55 years), results were similar with a lower dislocation rate in the DMC group (P = .24) and no increased risk of early aseptic loosening (P = .49).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that for all rTHA indications DMC compared to SMC has a significantly decreased risk of postoperative dislocation without risk of early aseptic loosening at medium term follow-up. The use of DMC in rTHA is an important consideration particularly with the predicted increased incidence of both primary and revision THA globally.

Dual-mobility cups in revision acetabular reconstructions: Short-term outcomes in high-risk patients for instability

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of dual-mobility (DM) cup systems for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) in patients who had high risk for instability.

Methods

We prospectively followed up 34 hips of 30 patients (27 females, 3 males; mean age: 66.1 (range: 33 to 89) years) who underwent rTHA with DM cups for aseptic loosening in 23 hips, infection treatment as second or single stage in nine hips, and instability in two hips. Clinical functions of the patients were evaluated using the Harris Hip Score (HHS), and radiological migration or loosening of the DM cups were recorded. The survival of the components was calculated with the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and failure was defined as any dislocation of the polyethylene (PE) insert, intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD), aseptic loosening of any component or total hip system revision due to any reason.

Results

The mean duration of follow-up was 3.52 (range: 2.05 to 6.26) years. There was one dislocation of PE insert (2.9%), which was treated with closed reduction. There were two (5.8%) re-revisions for cemented DM cup due to migration. There was one PE insert and head change due to subacute infection. The mean HHS increased from 42.8 ± 6.7 (range: 34 to 60) points preoperatively to 87.3 ± 5.8 (range: 75 to 98) points postoperatively. The cumulative survival rate of the DM cup system was 91.2% (95% CI: 81.6–100%) with any revision, 94.1% (95% CI: 86.2–100%) with aseptic loosening and %97.1 (%95 CI: 91.4–100%) with dislocation as the end point at 3.5 years.

Conclusion

Dual-mobility cups may provide good stability and represent a good option for revision acetabular reconstruction in patients who have high risk for instability.

Level of evidence

Level IV, therapeutic study.