Dual mobility cups in total hip arthroplasty

Cemented dual mobility cup for primary total hip arthroplasty: survival and quality of life. A multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Dual mobility cups are characterized by having a prosthetic head inside a polyethylene core that later articulates with a metal cup implanted in the acetabulum. These cups can be cemented or uncemented. This study aimed to determine the survival of a cemented dual-mobility cup (CDMC) with a cobalt-chromium head (CoCr) and the quality of life (QOL) of operated patients.

METHODOLOGY

Multicenter historical cohort study where survival and QOL were estimated. The cohort includes patients who underwent a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a CDMC and CoCr head. The patients were operated on between 2011 and 2013.

RESULTS

40 patients from 6 institutions with a median age of 81 (IQR 22.25) years. The results in the Kaplan-Meier estimation showed a survival of 94.2% (95% CI [86.6% - 100%]) at 5 years and a maximum follow-up of 9.5 years. Three failures occurred (two dislocations and one mechanical loosening), and Oxford Hip Scale (OHS) of 41.5 (IQR 10.50) points was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of survival and the score obtained in the OHS, the CDMC has comparable results with the scientific literature found on uncemented dual mobility cups. This demonstrates adequate results in patients with a maximum follow-up of 9.5 years.

Intraprosthetic Dislocation Following Dual Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrieval Analysis Study

Background

Dual mobility (DM) implants in total hip arthroplasty provide excellent range of motion with low dislocation rates. A complication of this design is intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD), where the polyethylene (PE) liner dissociates from the femoral head. In older designs, IPD occurred due to a small head size and late PE wear with head-capture-mechanism failure. Routine retrieval analysis identified concerns regarding IPD of modern implants, and scant reporting in the literature led to this retrospective study.

Methods

A total of 124 (110 primary, 14 revision) DM implants (mean in situ time 2.0 ± 3.1 years) revised by 20 surgeons across Western Australia between July 2014 and August 2023 were assessed. Demographics, clinical information, mechanisms of failure, and observations at revision arthroplasty were analyzed. The retrieval analysis included an assessment of metal and PE wear mechanisms, corrosion between modular components, and extent of bony attachment to acetabular shells.

Results

There were 11 cases of IPD. Of these, 8 (73%) had a documented preceding failed closed reduction, with the remaining 3 revised due to trunnionosis, loosening, and joint instability. Nine out of 11 (82%) cases were female. Although metallic wear and inner-lip impingement of PE bearings were observed, there was no obvious failure mechanism for the other 3 retrieved IPD implants.

Conclusions

Most cases of IPD in DM implants occur after failed closed reduction in the setting of a hip dislocation, suggesting an iatrogenic cause of IPD. No implant-related features could be defined for the remaining cases. Recognizing common failure modes can help with the prevention and treatment of this complication.

What Is the Most Optimal Bearing Surface for Minimizing Instability After Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?

Based on the results of our meta-analysis, dual mobility implants appear to have the most efficacy in preventing instability following revision total hip arthroplasty. Notwithstanding, given the relatively small sample sizes of the included studies, in conjunction with heterogeneity in study design, it is important to recognize that further large randomized controlled trials are necessary to determine the optimal bearing surface to reduce the risk of instability after revision total hip arthroplasty.

A Unique Variant of Intra-Prosthetic Dislocation in Dual Mobility Articulation Total Hip Arthroplasty-Displacement of Metal Liner

Total hip arthroplasty stands as a milestone in surgical success for alleviating hip arthritis-related pain and enhancing patients' quality of life. While complications persist, advancements like dual-mobility articulation aims to mitigate risks. This manuscript presents an unprecedented unique complication in a 60-year-old woman with a revision dual mobility THA. The metal liner displaced from its original position causing impingement at the medial aspect of the femoral neck and deformation of the acetabular shell. Radiographic evidence revealed the displaced liner cutting into the femoral neck. This unusual complication prompted a re-revision, revealing severe damage to the acetabular cup and femoral neck. While intra-prosthetic dislocations in dual-mobility articulations are recognized, this case deviates from conventional types, emphasizing the need for ongoing vigilance in prosthesis design and patient follow-up. This case report highlights a new variant of intra-prosthetic dislocations to the existing literature on dual-mobility THA complications.

Dual Mobility in Extreme Situations of Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Series of 3 Cases and Review of Literature

Introduction

Dual mobility (DM) total hip replacement (THR) features an acetabular component with an unconstrained tripolar build which ensures a greater range of motion without provoking any dislocation.We report three cases with extremes of surgical misadventure where we carried out a revision arthroplasty with a DM cup. The causes of the failure of the primary arthroplasty were multifactorial, even individually, and ranged from instability due to component malposition, trochanteric fracture, intrapelvic prosthesis protrusion, etc.

Case Report

(1) Case 1 is a 40-year-old male, who following a failed fixation of a right proximal femur shaft fracture had undergone a proximal femur replacement outside with a proximal femur bipolar prosthesis and presented with a dislocated prosthesis due to excessive anteversion of 40 of the stem. Revision was done by inserting a DM cup without revising the stem to preserve the valuable femoral bone stock. (2) Case 2 is an 84-year-old comorbid female, who had come with right protrusio acetabuli with bipolar prosthesis in situ. The patient was managed with bone grafting and insertion of a DM cup with a peripheral fit. Greater trochanter wiring was done for the greater trochanter fracture (GTF) along with prophylactic posterior column plating. (3) Case 3 is a 60-year-old male, who had left sided chronic THR instability. He has had three previous episodes of dislocation which started after 7 years, when the patient fell and had a GTF. Here, the causes of instability were multifactorial- GTF, malposition, and liner wear. Instead of using a constrained liner and predisposing the patient to impingement, we did an isolated revision with a DM cup only.

Conclusion

The presented cases highlight the versatility and efficacy of utilizing a DM cup in revision arthroplasty for addressing diverse causes of primary hip arthroplasty failure. The adaptability is demonstrated in preserving the bone stock, managing bone loss, and addressing multifactorial instability, thereby emphasizing its widespread potential.

Dual-Mobility Articulations in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Mid-Term Outcomes From the American Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been an increased utilization of dual-mobility (DM) implants in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) to mitigate the risk of postoperative hip instability. This study aimed to present mid-term outcomes of DM bearings in primary THA using data from the American Joint Replacement Registry.

METHODS

Screening was conducted on patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent primary THA between 2012 and 2018. Patients were categorized into three groups: (1) DM articulation, (2) ≤ 32-mm femoral head, and (3) ≥ 36-mm femoral head. Multivariable statistical modeling was employed to analyze patient and hospital characteristics, minimizing potential confounding variables and identifying independent associations with revision. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to assess all-cause revision and revision specifically for instability. A total of 207,526 primary THAs were identified. Among them, 13,896 (6.7%) utilized DM articulation, 60,358 (29.1%) had a femoral head size of ≤ 32 mm, and 133,272 (64.2%) had a femoral head size of ≥ 36 mm.

RESULTS

At the 8-year follow-up, the all-cause revision rate was higher in the DM group (3.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1 to 4.1) compared to the ≤ 32-mm (2.6%, 95% CI 2.5 to 2.8) and ≥ 36-mm (2.7%, 95% CI 2.5 to 2.9) groups. However, the revision rate for instability was comparable among the DM (0.4%, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5), ≤ 32 mm (0.5%, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.5), and ≥ 36 mm (0.3%, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.4) groups at 8-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of DM was associated with higher overall revision rates. However, no significant differences in rates of revision for instability were observed among any of the bearing surface groups. These findings may be attributed to surgeons selectively utilizing DM articulations in higher-risk patients.

Dual Mobility Articulation in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Mixed Femoral and Acetabular Components are a Feasible Option

BACKGROUND

The utilization of a different manufacturer for the prosthetic femoral head and the polyethylene insert in dual mobility (DM) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) may be necessary, especially in the revision setting. However, there is no data in the literature about this application. This study evaluated the outcomes of mixed manufacturer components, with the hypothesis that there would be no difference in measured outcomes compared to matched components.

METHODS

The DM articulations implanted during THA revision were retrospectively reviewed from 2011 to 2017. The study group was then stratified into 2 cohorts: matching components or mixed components. Of 130 hips included in the study with DM articulations with average follow-up of 7 years, 103 had mixed and 27 had matching manufacturer components. Rates of all cause reoperation and revision, intraprosthetic dislocation, dislocation, and aseptic loosening were compared using Chi-squared and Fisher's exact test; survival analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

Matched and mixed manufacturer implants had no significant difference between all cause reoperation (33 versus 25.2%), dislocation (14.8 versus 7.7%), and aseptic loosening (3.7 versus 3.9%), respectively. Higher rates of intraprosthetic dislocation (11 versus 0.97%) were observed in the matching component cohort. Survival analysis showed similar outcomes at 2, 5, and 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Mixed-component DM articulations show similar results compared to matching components. The off-label use of mixed manufacture DM articulation in THA is a feasible and safe option in the correct patient. Furthermore, when encountering a well-fixed femoral stem or acetabular shell, the use of a mixed component DM articulations may reduce the morbidity for the patient and prevent revision of all components.

The Frank Stinchfield Award: Assembly and Dissociation Forces Differ Between Commonly Used Dual Mobility Implants: A Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a complication unique to dual mobility (DM) implants where the outer polyethylene head dissociates from the inner femoral head. Increasing reports of IPD at the time of closed reduction of large head DM dislocations prompted this biomechanical study evaluating the assembly and dissociation forces of DM heads.

METHODS

We tested 17 polyethylene DM heads from 5 vendors. Of the heads, 12 were highly cross-linked polyethylene (4 vendors) and 5 were infused with vitamin E (2 vendors). Heads were between 46 and 47 mm in diameter, accepting a 28 mm-inner ceramic head. Implants were assembled and disassembled using a servohydraulic machine that recorded the forces and torques applied during testing. Dissociation was tested via both axial pull-out and lever-out techniques, where lever-out simulated stem-on-acetabular component impingement.

RESULTS

The initial maximum assembly force was significantly different between all vendors (P < .01) and decreased for all implants with subsequent assembly. Vendor 4-E (Link with vitamin E) heads required the highest assembly force (1,831.9 ± 81.95 N), followed by Vendor 3 (Smith & Nephew), Vendor 5 (DePuy Synthes), Vendor 1-E (Zimmer Biomet with vitamin E), Vendor 2 (Stryker), and Vendor 1 (Zimmer Biomet Arcom). Vendor 4-E implants showed the greatest dissociation resistance in both pull-out (2,059.89 N, n = 1) and lever-out (38.95 ± 2.79 Nm) tests. Vendor 1-E implants with vitamin E required higher assembly force, dissociation force, and energy than Vendor 1 heads without vitamin E.

CONCLUSIONS

There were notable differences in DM assembly and dissociation forces between implants. Diminishing force was required for assembly with each additional trial across vendors. Vendor 4-E DM heads required the highest assembly and dissociation forces. Vitamin E appeared to increase the assembly and dissociation forces. Based on these results, DM polyethylene heads should not be reimplanted after dissociation, and there may be a role for establishing a minimum dissociation energy standard to minimize IPD risk.

Dislocation of primary total hip arthroplasty: Analysis of risk factors and preventive options

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful elective operations in orthopedic surgery for improving pain and functional disability in patients with end-stage joint disease. However, dislocation continues to be a troublesome complication after THA, as it is a leading cause of revision and is associated with substantial social, health, and economic costs. It is a relatively rare, usually early occurrence that depends on both the patients' characteristics and the surgical aspects. The most recent and important finding is the special attention to be given preoperatively to spinopelvic mobility, which is closely related to the incidence of dislocation. Consequently, clinical and radiographic assessment of the lumbar spine is mandatory to identify an altered pelvic tilt that could suggest a different positioning of the cup. Lumbar spinal fusion is currently considered a risk factor for dislocation and revision regardless of whether it is performed prior to or after THA. Surgical options for its treatment and prevention include the use of prostheses with large diameter of femoral head size, dual mobility constructs, constrained liners, and modular neck stems.

Early Intraprosthetic Dislocation of Total Hip Arthroplasty with Double Mobility Implant: Case Report

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful surgery in the treatment of hip pain, but there are potential complications, of which dislocation is one of the most common. Dislocation management is a challenging problem that requires a multimodal approach, and the use of dual mobility implants is an option. We present a patient with a history of femoral neck fracture who underwent THA with a double mobility implant. On the 18 th postoperative day, after a fall to the ground, she developed prosthesis dislocation and had a complication after closed reduction, a subsequent intraprosthetic dislocation. After a radiographic diagnosis, the patient presented mechanical signs of hip flexion caused by a disassociated double mobility implant. The revision surgery was indicated, but the patient chose not to perform the necessary surgical procedure. A careful postoperative study of the radiographs revealed an eccentric femoral head and evidence of disassociated implantation in the surrounding soft tissues. Radiographs after closed reduction of intraprosthetic dislocations should be examined thoroughly.

Incidence, treatment, and outcomes of modern dual-mobility intraprosthetic dissociations

Aims

Dual-mobility (DM) components are increasingly used to prevent and treat dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a rare complication of DM that is believed to have decreased with contemporary implants. This study aimed to report incidence, treatment, and outcomes of contemporary DM IPD.

Methods

A total of 1,453 DM components were implanted at a single academic institution between January 2010 and December 2021: 695 in primary and 758 in revision THA. Of these, 49 presented with a dislocation of the large DM head and five presented with an IPD. At the time of closed reduction of the large DM dislocation, six additional IPDs occurred. The mean age was 64 years (SD 9.6), 54.5% were female (n = 6), and mean follow-up was 4.2 years (SD 1.8). Of the 11 IPDs, seven had a history of instability, five had abductor insufficiency, four had prior lumbar fusion, and two were conversions for failed fracture management.

Results

The incidence of IPD was 0.76%. Of the 11 IPDs, ten were missed either at presentation or after attempted reduction. All ten patients with a missed IPD were discharged with a presumed reduction. The mean time from IPD to surgical treatment was three weeks (0 to 23). One patient died after IPD prior to revision. Of the ten remaining hips with IPD, the DM head was exchanged in two, four underwent acetabular revision with DM exchange, and four were revised to a constrained liner. Of these, five (50%) underwent reoperation at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.73), including one additional acetabular revision. No patients who underwent initial acetabular revision for IPD treatment required subsequent reoperation.

Conclusion

The overall rate of IPD was low at 0.76%. It is essential to identify an IPD on radiographs as the majority were missed at presentation or after iatrogenic dissociation. Surgeons should consider acetabular revision for IPD to allow conversion to a larger DM head, and take care to remove impinging structures that may increase the risk of subsequent failure.

Malseated Liner in Modular Dual Mobility Total Hip Replacement: A Report of Three Cases

Modular dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be associated with complications if the liner is malseated, which can be unappreciated intraoperatively. A meticulous surgical technique is needed to ensure that the liner is perfectly seated. In addition, a malseated liner can be missed if the postoperative films are not carefully reviewed by the surgeon. We present three cases of THA associated with a malseated modular dual mobility liner. In one case, the malpositioned liner was appreciated intraoperatively, but it was wedged in place and could not be removed. The entire shell needed to be revised. In two other cases, malseating was not detected intra-operatively. Both were appreciated postoperatively, and early revision surgery was needed.

A Meta-Analysis to Evaluate Implant Survival and Benefits of the Use of Dual Mobility Constructs in Total Hip Replacement Following Hip Fracture

Total hip replacement (THR) is commonly performed to treat hip fractures. Dual-mobility constructs (DMCs) are increasingly used for this indication. The aim of this study was to use evidence synthesis techniques to estimate net all-cause construct survival for THR with DMC performed for hip fracture. Additionally, we aimed to investigate and describe differences in all-cause construct survival (if present) between THRs performed with DMC (DMC-THR) or with a conventional bearing construct following hip fracture. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies (including joint registries), including DMC-THR for hip fracture which provided Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival estimates. The primary outcome was all-cause construct survival over time. The study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020173117). A total of 557 papers and 17 registry reports were identified. Six studies (four registry reports, one matched-pair cohort study utilising joint registry data, and one single-institution case series) met the inclusion criteria, including 17,370 DMC THRs and 167,377 conventional THRs. Five-year KM survival estimates (95% confidence intervals) were similar at 95.4% (94.9 to 95.8%) for DMC-THR and 96.2% (96.0 to 96.4%) for conventional THR. The relative risk of revision for DMC-THR at five years was 1.21 (1.05 to 1.41). These results suggest that DMC-THR has a lower all-cause survival than conventional THR following hip fracture. This analysis does not support the routine use of DMC-THR over conventional bearing THR.

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.

Dual Mobility for Oncological Hip Reconstruction: Significantly Reduced Dislocation Rates at 5 years

BACKGROUND

Although dual mobility total hip arthroplasty has become increasingly common in recent years, limited remains known on dual mobility in surgical oncology. This university-based investigation compared dislocation and revision rates of DMs, conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA), and hemiarthroplasties (HAs) for oncological hip reconstruction.

METHODS

An institutional tumor registry was used to identify 221 patients undergoing 45 DMs, 67 conventional THAs, and 109 HAs, performed for 17 primary hip tumors and 204 hip metastases between 2010 and 2020. The median age at surgery was 65 years, and 52% were female. The mean follow-up was 2.5 years. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves and log-rank tests were done to compare dislocation and revision rates among all 221 patients, after a one-to-one propensity match, based on age, sex, tumor type (metastasis, primary tumor), and tumor localization (femur, acetabulum).

RESULTS

The 5-year survivorship free of dislocation was 98% in DMs, 66% in conventional THAs ( P = 0.03; all P values compared with DMs), and 97% among HAs ( P = 0.48). The 5-year survivorship free of revision was 69% in DMs, 62% in conventional THAs ( P = 0.68), and 92% in HAs ( P = 0.06). After propensity matching, the 5-year survivorship free of dislocation was 42% in 45 conventional THAs ( P = 0.027; compared with all 45 DMs) and 89% in 16 matched HAs ( P = 0.19; compared with 16 DMs with femoral involvement only). The 5-year survivorship free of revision was 40% in matched conventional THAs ( P = 0.91) and 100% in matched HAs ( P = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

DMs showed markedly lower rates of dislocation than conventional THAs, with overall revision rates remaining comparable among different designs. DMs should be considered the option of choice for oncological hip reconstruction if compared with conventional THAs. HAs are a feasible alternative when encountering femoral disease involvement only.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Intraprosthetic Dislocation of a Modular Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty With Posterior Migration of the Polyethylene Liner

Dual-mobility (DM) implants have been used in total hip arthroplasty since 1974. Modular DM implants have seen an increase in use in primary and revision total hip arthroplasties given the theoretical decreased dislocation rate. DM constructs have 2 articulation sites, one between the acetabular shell and a polyethylene liner, as well as one between the liner and the femoral head component. However, dislocations with modular DM implant dislocations can still occur. These dislocations occur via an extraprosthetic or intraprosthetic mechanism. Intraprosthetic dislocation is a phenomenon in which the smaller femoral head dissociates from the polyethylene liner. We present a case of intraprosthetic dislocation in an 81-year-old female with migration of the polyethylene liner into her gluteal muscles after 2 attempted closed reductions.

Femoral Neck Design Does Not Impact Revision Risk After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Dual Mobility Cup

Background

The use of dual mobility (DM) cups has increased quickly. It is hypothesized that femoral neck taper geometry may be involved in the risk of prosthetic impingement and DM cup revision. We aim to (1) explore the reasons for revision of DM cups or head/liners and (2) explore whether certain femoral neck characteristics are associated with a higher risk of revision of DM cups.

Methods

Primary total hip arthroplasties with a DM cup registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register between 2007 and 2021 were identified (n = 7603). Competing risk survival analyses were performed, with acetabular component and head/liner revision as the primary endpoint. Reasons for revision were categorized in cup-/liner-related revisions (dislocation, liner wear, acetabular loosening). Femoral neck characteristics were studied to assess whether there is an association between femoral neck design and the risk of DM cup/liner revision. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed.

Results

The 5- and 10-year crude cumulative incidence of DM cup or head/liner revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening was 0.5% (CI 0.4-0.8) and 1.9% (CI 1.3-2.8), respectively. After adjusting for confounders, we found no association between the examined femoral neck characteristics (alloy used, neck geometry, CCD angle, and surface roughness) and the risk for revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening.

Conclusions

The risk of DM cup or head/liner revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening was low. We found no evidence that there is an association between femoral neck design and the risk of cup or head/liner revision.

Running-in behavior of dual-mobility cup during the gait cycle: A finite element analysis

The running-in process is considered an essential aspect of the comprehensive wear process. The phenomenon of running-in occurs during the initial stages of wear in the prosthetic hip joint. Within the field of tribology, the running-in phenomenon of the hip joint pertains to the mechanism by which the contact surfaces of the artificial hip joint components are adjusted and a suitable lubricating film is formed. During the process of hip joint running-in, there is an interaction between the metal surface of the ball and the joint cup, which results in adjustments being made until a steady state is achieved. The achievement of desirable wear existence and reliable performance of artificial hip joint components are reliant upon the tribological running-in of the hip joint. Despite the establishment of current modeling approaches, there remains a significant lack of understanding concerning running-in wear, particularly the metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) articulations in dual-mobility cups (DMC). An essential aspect to consider is the running-in phase of the dual mobility component. The present study employed finite element analysis to investigate the running-in behavior of dual mobility cups, wherein femoral head components were matched with polyethylene liners of varying thicknesses. The analysis of the running-in phase was conducted during the normal gait cycle. The results of this investigation may be utilized to design a dual-mobility prosthetic hip joint that exhibits minimal running-in wear.

Intraprosthetic dislocation of dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty implant

Dual-mobility total hip arthroplasties were developed to decrease the risk of dislocation and instability seen with traditional fixed-bearing total hip arthroplasties. However, dual-mobility constructs, notably the first-generation design, come with a risk of intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD). These dislocations occur when the polyethylene femoral head component is dislodged, causing direct articulation between the inner ceramic femoral head and the metal acetabular shell. This is different than a polyethylene liner dislocation in a standard total hip arthroplasty. Causes of IPD include polyethylene wear and iatrogenic dislocation from closed reduction attempts. Timely identification is essential to reduce the risk of soft tissue metallosis, raised cobalt and chromium levels, and the need for major revisions. This complication can be seen on imaging, but radiologists must be aware of the various components and mechanisms of failure to recognize this unique complication. We present a case of a dual-mobility construct with IPD between the femoral head components, illustrated on radiographs and CT and subsequently confirmed at the time of surgery.

A Missed Diagnosis of Intraprosthetic Dislocation in a Dual-Mobility Bearing Following Closed Reduction

Dual-mobility bearings have been found to reduce the rate of dislocation following both primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. Their unique design involves two articulating surfaces which increases construct stability but also leaves them susceptible to a unique complication known as intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD). We report the case of a 33-year-old female who sustained an IPD following closed reduction. Following a missed radiographic diagnosis, the patient experienced pain and mechanical symptoms secondary to her implant failure. Surgical removal of the dislodged liner with component revision was required. This case highlights several crucial steps in the management of patients with dislocated total hip arthroplasties including implant identification and careful review of postreduction radiographs. We also discuss several strategies to properly diagnose, manage, and avoid IPD.

Removing Cemented Dual Mobility Liners From Acetabular Components: A Technical Tip for a Challenging Surgical Problem

Dislocation remains the leading cause of failure following revision total hip arthroplasty. Dual mobility (DM) constructs, including monoblock cups designed for cementation, reduce but do not eliminate this risk. Cemented DM constructs offer several unique advantages in revision total hip arthroplasty, and as such, they have gained popularity. Despite their advantages, a portion of these implants will require revision for infection or recurrent dislocation. Removal of a cemented DM cup presents numerous challenges, and there is no effective published technique. Here, we present an effective technique for the safe removal of one design of cemented DM cup.

Evolution and New Generation of Dual Mobility Cups

Although total hip arthroplasty (THA) is considered a successful procedure, hip dislocation remains the main cause of early failure. Dual mobility cups (DMCs) have been shown to significantly reduce the dislocation rate in both primary and revision THAs. During the past several decades, DMCs have evolved in design and fixation interface. There have been three generations of DMCs. This article addresses the rationale for a new cementless highly porous titanium DMC to improve component fixation and implant biocompatibility. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(5):e273-e280.].

Medium-term outcome of the Libra® cemented versus cementless stems in primary dual mobility total hip arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Despite the increasing use of cementless stems in total hip arthroplasty, the cemented stem has played a valuable role in the armamentarium of orthopedic surgeons. This study aims to compare two types of Libra® stems SERF, one cemented (Libra® C) and the other cementless hydroxyapatite coated (Libra® HA) that were conducted to analyze the medium-term outcome regarding their behavior and longevity.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study for patients who received primary total hip arthroplasty with Dual Mobility (DM) articulation in the period between January 2014 to January 2020 with a minimum of two years follow-up. Two-hundred hips have been identified in 196 patients. One hundred forty-three Libra® cementless versus fifty-seven Libra cemented stems were implanted and the outcome of these stems is reported. All procedures were performed through the posterior approach and cemented stems were selected for elderly patients with wide medullary canals Dorr Type C. The indications for the index procedure were fractures, avascular necrosis, rheumatoid, and osteoarthritis. One hundred thirty-nine cementless DM cups were used while sixty-one hips had cemented Novae stick cups. Radiological evaluation for cup and stem positions, cement mantle, and radiolucent lines was performed, besides clinical function using the Harris Hip Score.

RESULTS

The average age of patients was 60 ± 14.8. At the latest review, none of the cemented stems was revised or awaiting revision. One cementless stem was revised because of cortical perforation. Five intraoperative fractures were observed in the cementless group, but none of them needed revision or affected the stem stability. Readmission to theatre occurred in four patients to evacuate hematoma in two, a reduction of dislocation in one, and grafting bone lysis in one.

CONCLUSION

Cemented stems have an important role in osteoporotic patients with wide medullary canals with excellent outcomes and minimal risk of fracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Dislocated and Dissociated Dual-Mobility Components Are Easily Missed and More Than Half Fail Closed Reduction: Six Tips to Aid Management

Dual-mobility (DM) implants reduce the risk of dislocation in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, DM implants are at risk for large-head dislocation and intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD), where the inner femoral head dissociates from the outer polyethylene head. This study aimed to report the incidence of DM dislocation and IPD, evaluate the rate of recognition of IPD before and after reduction, investigate the outcomes of these complications, and provide treatment recommendations for their management.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2021, 695 primary and 758 revision THAs were performed with DM constructs at a single institution. There were 44 large-head dislocations (3.0%) and 10 IPDs (0.7%). Four additional IPDs occurred during attempted closed reduction, increasing the IPD incidence to 0.96%. We reviewed prior instability history, dislocation management, success of reduction, recognition of IPD, and subsequent rates of revision and complications. The mean follow-up was 2.5 years.

Results

Nine of 10 IPDs were missed at presentation and thus not treated as such. Sixty-three percent of attempted closed reductions in the emergency department failed and led to 4 IPDs and 1 periprosthetic fracture. Reduction success was associated with the following factors: use of general anesthesia with paralysis (p = 0.02), having the reduction performed by an orthopaedist (p = 0.03), and undergoing only 1 reduction attempt (p = 0.015). Two-thirds of dislocations required revision. The rate of redislocation was 33%, and 5 hips required subsequent revision at a mean of 1.8 years after the initial dislocation.

Conclusions

We present an evaluation of DM-implant dislocation and dissociation along with management recommendations based on these data. Given the low success and high complication rates of attempted closed reduction and the need for eventual revision, we recommend that all patients with dislocated DM implants be brought to the operating room for closed reduction as well as potential revision if the reduction fails.

Level of Evidence

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Mixed manufacturer dual mobility bearing and the Exeter V40 Stem: is it safe? Short-term results in primary and revision hip replacement

The aim is to review clinical and radiological outcomes for all cases of primary and revision THA, combining a cemented stem (Exeter V40) with a dual mobility component from a different manufacturer (SERF Novae), to evaluate whether concerns regarding mixing components from different manufacturers are justified. We identified 72 hip replacements performed between May 2010 and December 2015 using the SERF Novae dual mobility cup with an Exeter V40 stem, the majority of which were cemented (90%) and revisions (58%). Patients were evaluated clinically and radiologically at a minimum of two years. There were five (6.9%) dislocations; three (4.2%) requiring revision - one of which was an intra-prosthetic disarticulation and two infections. No cases were lost to follow-up and 49 surviving cases were reviewed at a mean of 4.0 (range 1.8-8.1) years following surgery. Pain and functional outcome scores all improved. There were no radiological failures and no revisions for aseptic loosening of stem or cup. The combination of Exeter cemented stem with a dual mobility bearing from a different manufacturer results in acceptable short-term outcomes in terms of hip stability, revision rates and patient-reported measures.

Acetabular Wall Weakening in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Pilot Study

Total hip arthroplasty is a widely performed operation allowing disabled patients to improve their quality of life to a degree greater than any other elective procedure. Planning for a THA requires adequate patient assessment and preoperative characterizations of acetabular bone loss via radiographs and specific classification schemes. Some surgeons may be inclined to ream at a larger diameter thinking it would lead to a more stable press-fit, but this could be detrimental to the acetabular wall, leading to intraoperative fracture. In the attempt to reduce the incidence of intraoperative fractures, the current study aims to identify how increased reaming diameter degrades and weakens the acetabular rim strength. We hypothesized that there is proportionality between the reaming diameter and the reduction in acetabular strength. To test this hypothesis, this study used bone surrogates, templated from CT scans, and reamed at different diameters. The obtained bone surrogate models were then tested using an Intron 8874 mechanical testing machine (Instron, Norwood, MA) equipped with a custom-made fixture. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to identify differences among reamed diameters while linear regression was used to identify the relationship between reamed diameters and acetabular strength. We found a moderate correlation between increasing reaming diameter that induced thinning of the acetabular wall and radial load damage. For the simplified acetabular model used in this study, it supported our hypothesis and is a promising first attempt in providing quantitative data for acetabular weakening induced by reaming.

Prevalence of groin pain after primary dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability remains a challenging problem following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual-mobility (DM) components are used with increasing frequency to mitigate this potential complication. As has been shown with larger metal-on-metal (MoM) THA, the larger size femoral head may pose an increased risk of groin pain. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of groin pain following primary DM THA compared to other THA constructs.

METHODS

We identified 190 primary THAs (183 patients) performed with DM components at a single academic institution from 2008 to 2017. We retrospectively reviewed standardised patient questionnaires and the electronic medical record to determine the prevalence of groin pain. DM patients were compared to historical controls of 39 MoM hip resurfacing, 26 large-head MoM THA, and 217 conventional THA. Mean age was 64 years, 58% were female, mean body mass index was 30 kg/m², and mean follow-up was 3.5 years (range 2-8 years).

RESULTS

The prevalence of groin pain in patients with DM components was 5%, similar to the prevalence reported by patients with conventional THA (7%). There was a decreased prevalence of groin pain in DM patients compared to hip resurfacing (18%) and MoM THA (15%). Among the 9 DM patients with groin pain, 1 was treated with iliopsoas injection, and 1 underwent radiofrequency ablation of the articular nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents a relatively low prevalence of groin pain among primary DM THA patients. This is comparable with historical controls of conventional THA and decreased compared to hip resurfacing and large head MoM THA.

The Role of Dual-Mobility Components in Total Hip Arthroplasty

➤

Dual mobility (DM) refers to a now widely available option for total hip articulation. DM implants feature a small inner head, a hard bearing, that connects via a taper fit onto the femoral trunnion. This head freely rotates but is encased inside a larger, outer polyethylene head that articulates with a smooth acetabular component.

➤

DM acetabular components are available in the form of a monoblock shell or as a liner that is impacted into a modular shell, providing a metal articulation for the polyethylene outer head.

➤

DM is designed to increase hip stability by providing the arthroplasty construct with a higher jump distance, head-to-neck ratio, and range of motion prior to impingement.

➤

The use of DM in total hip arthroplasty continues to increase in the United States for both primary and revision arthroplasty. Surgeons should be aware of the potential benefits and pitfalls.

➤

Long-term data are lacking, especially for modular DM implants. Points of concern include a potential for accelerated polyethylene wear, intraprosthetic dislocation, and modular backside fretting corrosion.

Dual-Mobility Cups in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

Dual-mobility cups (DMCs) were introduced in France more than 40 years ago and are increasingly used not only in hip revision but also primary hip arthroplasty. Due to a simulated large-head articulation and increased jumping distance, DMCs can contribute to a high range of motion in the hip joint and reduce the risk of instability. Numerous studies have reported low dislocation rates and high survival rates in the mid-term follow-up. Nevertheless, long-term data, especially on primary hip replacement, remain limited, and the effect of recent designs and material innovations is still unclear. Therefore, primary DMCs are mainly proposed in patients at high risk for dislocation (i.e. pelvitrochanteric insufficiency, compromised spinopelvic mobility, neuromuscular disorders, obesity and femoral neck fractures). Based on a review of recently published studies referring to these indications, the current study discusses the advantages and disadvantages of DMCs.

Does fusion length matter? Total hip arthroplasty dislocation after extension of lumbosacral fusion: a case report

CASE

Hip-spine syndrome is a complex challenge for orthopedic surgeons. We present a 60-year-old female with a history of spinal fusion and total hip arthroplasty. The patient underwent extension of the previous fusion with sacropelvic fixation, and 5 months later she presented with left posterior prosthetic hip dislocation which required sedation and closed reduction.

CONCLUSION

Even with no change in lumbar lordosis or pelvic tilt and adequate acetabular cup position, extension of the fusion construct may predispose patients to dislocation. This may be the result of an increased lever arm acting at the hip joint, thereby leading to instability.

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.

Major acetabular defects: outcomes of first revision total hip arthroplasty using Kerboull cross-plate with allograft and cemented dual mobility cup at a maximum follow-up of fourteen years

BACKGROUND

The use of dual mobility cups (DMC) has been shown to reduce hip instability after revision surgery. For severe acetabular bone loss, reconstruction with a Kerboull cross-plate and bone allograft would contribute to restoring native hip position and bone stock. Only two papers reported on the combination of Kerboull cross-plate with bone allograft and cemented DMC in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

This is a monocentric retrospective study (28 cases) of first-time revision THA using such a construct in American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) grade III and IV acetabular bone defect. Detailed demographic, clinical and radiographic results were recorded and evaluated.

RESULTS

With a mean follow-up of six ± 3.63 years, no case of instability was reported. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was 88.4 ± 10.1. No hook fracture or mechanical failure was observed. Non-progressive radiolucent lines were recorded. Osteointegration of the allografts was observed in all cases with a mean Grodet score of 7.9 ± 0.97.

CONCLUSIONS

In first revision THA, the use of a Kerboull cross-plate with allograft and a cemented DMC in AAOS grade III and IV acetabular bone defects demonstrated excellent clinical and radiological outcomes with no recorded cases of dislocation or mechanical failure.

Hip Arthroscopy Results in Similar Short-Term Function Compared to THA in Patients of Similar Demographic Profiles

Purpose

To review short-term functional outcomes in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy and to compare their outcomes to those of a demographically similar cohort who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (SCOPE) between April 2008 and October 2015. SCOPE patients were included if they were ≥35 years, had preoperative and postoperative 2-year follow-up, and had no prior hip condition or ipsilateral hip surgery. SCOPE patients were matched 1:1 to a demographically similar cohort of patients who underwent THA at our institution. Matching criteria included similar age (within 5 years), gender, and body mass index (within 5). SCOPE patients were assessed with modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), non-arthritic hip score, and visual analogue scale (VAS). THA patients were assessed with mHHS, forgotten joint score, and VAS.

Results

Sixty-seven patients were included in each cohort. Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for management of labral tears achieved nearly equivalent mHHS, Health Survey Short Form (SF-12) Mental, SF-12 Physical, Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR-12) Mental, VR-12 Physical scores at latest follow-up compared to demographically similar patients who underwent THA. There was no significant difference in mHHS scores (SCOPE = 82.9 ± 16.4 vs THA = 87.3 ± 15, P = .095) between the 2 group groups. In addition, average patient satisfaction on a 10-point scale was 8.1 for the SCOPE cohort and 8.8 for the THA cohort (P = .052).

Conclusions

Our results show that hip arthroscopy, when performed in patients with the appropriate indications, can lead to comparably excellent outcomes as total hip arthroplasty with significant pain relief at short term follow-up.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

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.

Dual-mobility bearings in complex revision hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is associated with an increased dislocation risk. Dual-mobility (DM) bearings have been used to address this issue. Such constructs offer increased range of motion and enhanced stability whilst avoiding some issues associated with fully-constrained devices. DM bearings have been used in our unit since 2013.

METHODS

All rTHA cases since 2013 were reviewed using the following criteria: (1) use of a DM bearing; (2) extensive soft tissue or bone loss resulting from ARMD, infection or multiple revisions, or requiring custom or megaprosthetic reconstruction; (3) minimum 2-month follow-up.

RESULTS

52 cases were identified with a median of 2 previous operations (range 1-6) and mean follow-up of 14 (2-41) months. The Novae-Stick component was used in 50 cases, the Avantage in 2 and the Trident MDM in 1 case. 19 required acetabular reconstruction using trabecular metal and four required custom acetabular components. 19 required femoral reconstruction with a proximal or total femoral replacement.Postoperatively, 8 patients (15.4%) sustained a dislocation at a mean of 1.6 (range 1-3) months. 3 (5.8%) requiring re-revision. 1 required excision arthroplasty and 2 a constrained liner, 1 of which went on to have further instability. There were no intraprosthetic dislocations.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-mobility components are a viable option in the complex rTHA setting. Early dislocations can occur but the rate of instability is acceptable in this high-risk group.

Minimum Five-Year Outcomes of Modular Dual Mobility in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Using a modular dual-mobility (MDM) bearing in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been widely evaluated. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes and survivorship following MDM bearings in primary THA.

METHODS

We used our registry database for patients with an MDM bearing on primary THA, performed by 6 surgeons through supine direct lateral or direct anterior approach. MDM bearings were used most often when impingement or subluxation was present intraoperatively despite proper component position. Another indication was a patient with planned activities who might be at a higher risk of instability postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 127 MDM bearings were used in primary THA in 119 patients. Mean follow-up was 6.77 years (range 5-8.9). Five hips were revised, none of which were due to MDM bearing failure. Preoperative Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Veterans RAND/Short Form 12 Physical Health Score and Mental Health Score increased from 25.81 to 52.40 (P < .0001), 30.42 to 44.50 (P < .0001), and 36.21 to 52.70 (P < .0001) at latest completed survey follow-up, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This MDM bearing shows excellent functional outcomes at a minimum 5 years of follow-up with no bearing-related failures. It can be an excellent choice in primary THA specifically in females where the use of increased head size to prevent instability is not possible due to anatomical restrictions and liner thickness.

Dual mobility hip arthroplasty: iatrogenic intraprosthetic dislocation of a 22 mm head

We describe the first intraprosthetic dislocations of a 22 mm head in a dual mobility hip replacement in the literature. This case emphasises the importance of information gathering and planning when dealing with arthroplasty complications. Furthermore, it highlights the necessity of adequate muscle relaxation and analgesia when dealing with hip dislocations. A 78-year-old patient presented to the emergency department (ED) with a spontaneous dislocation of her left dual-mobility total hip replacement 3 months after first-stage revision surgery for infection. Reduction via manipulation under analgesia was then attempted in the ED but was ultimately unsuccessful; an iatrogenic intraprosthetic dislocation of the polyethylene liner was sustained. Several factors may have contributed to liner dislocation: a failure to appreciate the implant type, multiple manipulations in ED were attempted under analgesia, but no sedation or muscle relaxation was administered to the patient. The patient subsequently underwent revision surgery.

Inpatient dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: incidence and associated patient and hospital factors

INTRODUCTION

Inpatient dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) may incur substantial financial penalties for hospitals in the United States. However, limited studies report on current incidence and variability of dislocations. We utilised a large national database to evaluate inpatient hip dislocation trends regarding: (1) yearly incidences; (2) lengths of stay (LOS); (3) demographic factors; and (4) hospital metrics.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2012 to2016 for primary THA patients (n = 1,610,155), identifying 2490 inpatient dislocations. Various patient demographics and hospital characteristics were assessed. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to identify dislocation risk factors.

RESULTS

Dislocation rates increased from 0.11% in 2012 to 0.18% in 2016 (p < 0.001). Dislocated patients experienced significantly longer LOS (p < 0.001). Patient demographic factors associated with dislocation were sex, race, Medicaid insurance, alcohol use disorder, psychosis, hemiparesis/hemiplegia, chronic renal failure, and obesity. Spinal fusion was not associated with inpatient dislocation. Dislocations were likeliest in the South and least likely in teaching hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient dislocation has increased in recent years. Optimised management and recognition of the patient and hospital factors outlined in this study may help decrease inpatient dislocation risks following THA, thus avoiding hospital reimbursement penalties for this preventable complication.

The Diagnosis and Treatment of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium

Despite growing evidence supporting the evaluation, classification, and treatment of acetabular bone loss in revision hip replacement, advancements have not been systematically incorporated into a single document, and therefore, a comprehensive review of the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss is needed. The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center at Hospital for Special Surgery held an Acetabular Bone Loss Symposium on June 21, 2019, to answer the following questions: What are the trends, emerging technologies, and areas of future research related to the evaluation and management of acetabular bone loss in revision hip replacement? What constitutes the optimal workup and management strategies for acetabular bone loss? The 36 international experts convened were divided into groups, each assigned to discuss 1 of 4 topics: (1) preoperative planning and postoperative assessment; (2) implant selection, management of osteolysis, and management of massive bone loss; (3) the treatment challenges of pelvic discontinuity, periprosthetic joint infection, instability, and poor bone biology; and (4) the principles of reconstruction and classification of acetabular bone loss. Each group came to consensus, when possible, based on an extensive literature review. This document provides an overview of these 4 areas, the consensus each group arrived at, and directions for future research.

A novel hip joint prosthesis with uni-directional articulations for reduced wear

A novel polymer-on-metal hip joint prosthesis design that makes use of uni-directional articulations was developed and tested in this work. The new implant was tested using two polymer variants, virgin ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE), and Vitamin E-infused highly crosslinked polyethylene (VEHXPE). The degrees of freedom of the ball-and-socket are reproduced by three cylindrical orthogonally-aligned articulations. This unconventional design leverages on the molecular orientation hardening mechanisms of the polyethylene and increased contact area to minimize wear. An experimental hip joint simulator was used to compare the gravimetric wear of the conventional ball-on-socket and the new implant. The new prosthesis including UHMWPE components produced a 78% reduction in wear, whereas the new prosthesis with VEHXPE components produced a 100% reduction in wear, as no measurable wear was detected. Machining marks on the acetabular cups of the new prosthesis were retained for both polyethylene variants, further demonstrating the low levels of wear exhibited by the new implants. Both polyethylene materials produced particles in the range of 0.1-1.0 μm, which are the most biologically active. Nonetheless, the extremely low wear rates are likely to induce minimal osteolysis effects. Furthermore, the novel design also offers an increase of more than 24% in the range of motion in flexion/extension when compared to a dual-mobility hip implant. A prototype of the prosthesis was implanted into a Thiel-embalmed human cadaver during a mock-surgery, which demonstrated high resistance to dislocation and the possibility of performing a figure of four position.

Monobloc Dual Mobility With a Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up: A Safe and Effective Solution in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability constitutes over 20% of revisions after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual mobility (DM) designs were introduced as a solution to this problem. However, the few publications that have reported promising results for monobloc DM constructs have been limited by sample size or length of follow-up. The purpose of this study is to evaluate mid-term outcomes (minimum 5-year follow-up) of a single-surgeon series utilizing a monobloc DM acetabular component in patients with high risk for dislocation.

METHODS

This is a single-surgeon consecutive series of 207 primary THAs implanted with a monobloc DM component in patients who were considered at high risk for dislocation. Patient demographics and case-specific data were collected retrospectively. All patients had a minimum of 5-year follow-up. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess continuous variables, whereas categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test. Survival probability was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Radiographic analysis did not reveal acetabular radiolucency in any patients, and there were no revisions for aseptic loosening. In addition, there were no dislocations. Seven of 205 patients (3.4%) were revised, 5 on the femoral side due to periprosthetic fracture and the remaining two for infection. Survivorship of the acetabular component from revision was 99%. The mean Veteran RAND (VR-12) physical score improved from 7 (standard deviation [SD]: 13.7) preoperatively to 9.5 (SD: 17.6) at the final follow-up. Similarly, the hip disability osteoarthritis score improved from 8 (SD: 17.9) preoperatively to 21.2 (SD: 37).

CONCLUSION

Monobloc DM components reliably prevent dislocation after primary THA in high-risk patients. At mid-term follow-up, this DM monobloc component demonstrates excellent implant survivorship, radiographic fixation, and improved functional outcomes.

Acetabular Component and Liner Selection for the Prevention of Dislocation After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

»

Primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a reproducible and efficacious procedure for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis; however, dislocation remains the most common cause of revision arthroplasty.

»

Technological advancements in acetabular component design and liner options, in conjunction with a more comprehensive understanding of the spinopelvic factors that influence dislocation, will likely reduce the risk of dislocation and revision over time.

»

The contemporary liner and shell options for primary THA, in order of increasing constraint and stability, include (1) neutral, (2) lateralized, (3) face-changing (oblique), (4) lipped (high-wall) with or without lateralization, (5) modular and anatomic dual-mobility, and (6) constrained options.

»

Different liner designs can alter functional anteversion, inclination, and jump distance, and can be used to minimize a single predictable dislocation vector (lipped [high-wall] liners) or multiple vectors of instability risk when the dislocation direction is unpredictable (dual-mobility liners).

»

Liner selection should be based on the patient-specific risk of dislocation, including static anatomic (e.g., large anterior inferior iliac spine or greater trochanter morphology), dynamic anatomic (e.g., limited sitting-standing change in the sacral slope), and demographic or medical (e.g., neurocognitive disorders and obesity) risk factors.

Serum Metal Ions in Contemporary Monoblock and Modular Dual Mobility Articulations

Background

Questions exist about the release of cobalt and chromium ions from dual mobility (DM) cups. Modular implants, with potential backside wear between the cobalt-chromium liner and titanium cup, are of particular concern. This study compares the metal ion profile of patients with contemporary monoblock and modular DM articulations from two commonly used designs.

Methods

Cobalt and chromium serum levels were measured one year after surgery in a prospective cohort of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with a DM construct. Ion levels were detected above 1 μg/L. Clinical and surgical data were correlated with the ion levels for analysis.

Results

Overall, 29% of the patients had levels above 1 μg/L of either ion. More patients with modular cups had detectable ions than patients with monoblock cups (39% vs 20%, P = .05). Cobalt was more commonly detected in the monoblock group, and chromium was more commonly detected in the modular group (P = .05). There were no differences in the actual ion levels between the groups (1.35 μg/L vs 1.64 μg/L, P = .44, for cobalt and 1.35 μg/L vs 1.31 μg/L, P = .77, for chromium). No patient underwent revision during the follow-up period.

Conclusions

We found similar cobalt and chromium levels in patients with monoblock and modular DM cups. More patients in the modular group had detectable ions. Cobalt was more frequently detected in the monoblock group. These results suggest that both implants are performing well in the short term, but further follow-up is needed to determine whether the differences found are of clinical significance.

Late Breakage of a Dual-Mobility Polyethylene Insert in a Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Unusual Failure Mode

The use of dual-mobility cups has gained popularity in recent years. Thus, surgeons can expect an increase in known and new causes of failure. We report a previously undescribed form of a late intraprosthetic dislocation consisting of a complete breakage of a polyethylene mobile bearing that suffered a dislocation 3 months after its implantation. Two years later, he began feeling anterior groin pain and suffered gait changes. Computed tomography scan revealed an eccentric alignment of the mobile polyethylene bearing suggestive of poly wear. During the revision surgery, the polyethylene was found to be split in 2. Possible causes of this complication are proposed. Our case shows a previously unreported implant-specific complication, so surgeons can identify it.

Intraprosthetic Dislocation of Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty: The Unforeseen Complication

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful and widely accepted orthopedic procedures. Instability after THA is one of the most significant postoperative complications. Dual-mobility THA components were introduced in 1974 to overcome the risk of instability by increasing the jump distance. Dual-mobility bearings couple two articulations, namely, one between a 22-28 mm prosthetic head and polyethylene liner and another larger articulation between the polyethylene liner and the metal cup. Dislocation of the polyethylene liner and the consequent direct articulation between the prosthetic head and metal cup is recognized as intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD). This mode of THA failure is specific to dual-mobility implants. Despite the reduced incidence of IPD in modern dual-mobility implants compared to the early designs, iatrogenic IPD can occur during closed reduction of dislocated polyethylene liner-metal cup articulation. IPD requires timely diagnosis and early surgical intervention to minimize the necessity of major revision surgeries. This study presents a comprehensive review for dual-mobility-bearing THA, including the history and biomechanics, and focuses on the pathomechanics, diagnosis, and management of IPD.

Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?

Purpose

Reconstruction of the proximal femur after tumour resection can be performed with proximal femoral endopros-theses (PFE). Many studies have reported that bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) reduce the risk of dislocation after oncological resections. However, progressive cotyloiditis which might require acetabular resurfacing (total hip arthroplasty [THA]) has been reported. The aim of this study is to compare the results of BHA and THA after proximal femur resection.

Materials and Methods

A total of 104 consecutive patients affected by primary (n=52) and metastatic (n=52) bone tumours were included. Ninety patients underwent BHA and 14 patients underwent THA. Complications were recorded and classified according to the Henderson classification. At final follow-up, patients with the implant in site were functionally evaluated with modified Harris hip score (HHS).

Results

The mean follow-up was 50 months (range, 2–171 months). Twenty-four (23.1%) patients developed major complications. Eleven (12.2%) BHA required acetabular resurfacing. Patients affected by primary bone tumours showed an increased risk of THA conversion (P=0.042). A reduced risk was observed in patients younger than 35 years (P=0.043) and in those older than 65 years (P=0.033). Dislocation occurred in four case (3.8%), in particular after THA (P=0.021). At final follow-up, 93 patients had the prosthesis in site (80 BHA and 13 THA). Mean postoperative HHS was 70 (range, 30–90).

Conclusion

The risk of dislocation is lower for bipolar endoprosthesis compared to THA. However cotyloiditis and acetabular resurfacing might occurred.

Superior functional outcome with dual mobility THR as compared to conventional THR in fracture neck femur: a prospective cohort study

Introduction: Total Hip Replacement (THR) in displaced Fracture Neck of Femur (FNOF) is associated with higher dislocation rates. Conventional THR with a large femoral head and anterior approach has reduced the instability, but it remains higher than THR done for other aetiology. Recent studies have shown reduced dislocation rates with dual mobility THR (DMTHR) for FNOF; however, there is a lack of comparative research to show its superiority over conventional THR. Further, its role in the Asian subcontinent, where the patient requires sitting cross-legged or squatting, has not been studied. Methods: A prospective cohort study of 103 elderly patients with displaced FNOF with a minimum follow-up of 1-year. Fifty-two patients were operated on with DMTHR and fifty-one patients with conventional THR. Both the groups were matched in terms of demographic data, surgical approach, and postoperative protocol. Radiological and functional outcomes in terms of Harris Hip Score (HHS), Range of motion, Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM), and Dislocation rate were compared between the two groups. Results: Mean HHS of the DMTHR group was 76.37 at three months and 87.02 at the end of the 1-year postoperatively, which was significantly better than the conventional THR group 65.65 at three months and 72.96 at 1-year. The range of motion was significantly better in the DMTHR group than the conventional THR group. There was no significant difference in radiological outcomes and postoperative dislocation rate between the two groups. Conclusion: Dual mobility implants give better results than conventional implants for primary THA in elderly patients of displaced FNOF regarding better function and greater range of motion.

Femoral Neck Notching in Dual Mobility Implants: Is This a Reason for Concern?

BACKGROUND

Dual mobility (DM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) implants have been advocated for patients at risk for impingement due to abnormal spinopelvic mobility. Impingement against cobalt-chromium acetabular bearings, however, can result in notching of titanium femoral stems. This study investigated the incidence of femoral stem notching associated with DM implants and sought to identify risk factors.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study reviewed 256 modular and 32 monoblock DM components with minimum 1-year clinical and radiographic follow-up, including 112 revisions, 4 conversion THAs, and 172 primary THAs. Radiographs were inspected for evidence of femoral notching and to calculate acetabular inclination and anteversion. Revisions and dislocations were recorded.

RESULTS

Ten cases of femoral notching were discovered (3.5%), all associated with modular cylindrospheric cobalt-chromium DM implants (P = .049). Notches were first observed radiographically at mean 1.3 years after surgery (range 0.5-2.7 years). Notch location was anterior (20%), superior (60%), or posterior (20%) on the prosthetic femoral neck. Notch depth ranged from 1.7% to 20% of the prosthetic neck diameter. Eight cases with notching had lumbar pathology that can affect spinopelvic mobility. None of these notches resulted in stem fracture, at mean 2.7-year follow-up (range 1-7.6 years). There were no dislocations or revisions in patients with notching.

CONCLUSION

Femoral notching was identified in 3.5% of DM cases, slightly surpassing the dislocation rate in a cohort selected for risk of impingement and instability. Although these cases of notching have not resulted in catastrophic failures thus far, further study of clinical sequelae is warranted. Component position, spinopelvic mobility, and implant design may influence risk.

Clinical outcomes of endoprosthetic reconstruction for proximal femoral resection

INTRODUCTION

The proximal femur is a common site for primary sarcomas and metastatic lesions. Although the early results of tumor prostheses are promising, the long-term results of reconstruction are unknown. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the prognostic factors affecting prosthesis survival and complications after proximal femoral resection and reconstruction.

METHODS

We reviewed the results of 68 patients who underwent proximal femoral resection and reconstruction with a modular bipolar-type tumor prosthesis between 2005 and 2017. The mean follow-up was 55.6 months (range 6-172 months). There were 50 male and 18 female patients with a mean age of 41.5 years (range 11-80 years). Cumulative survival analysis was performed to analyze the risk factors of prosthesis survival. We also evaluated the complications after operation.

RESULTS

Fourteen (21%) patients required further surgery at a mean 37 months post-operatively (range 5-125 months). There were three cases of infection (4%), six of local recurrence (9%), three of acetabular erosion (4%) and two of stem loosening (3%). The implant survival rates were 83.9% at 5 years and 59.8% at 10 years. Prosthesis survivals did not differ based on fixation method (P = 0.085), age (P = 0.329) or resection length (P = 0.61). Acetabular chondrolysis was identified in 18 (26%) patients and longer resection length (≥20 cm) showed a trend for risk of acetabular wear (P = 0.132).

CONCLUSION

The results of proximal femoral resection and reconstruction with a modular bipolar-type prosthesis were found to be acceptable with infection and local recurrence as short-term complications and loosening and acetabular erosion as long-term complications.

Disassociation of an Anteriorly Implanted Dual-Mobility Component with Migration to the Distal Posterior Thigh: A Case Report

CASE

Intraprosthetic dislocation, a rare complication of modular dual-mobility hip replacements, occurs when the polyethylene component becomes dislodged. Our patient sustained an intraprosthetic dislocation with subsequent implant migration to the posterior thigh. In an anterior approach revision surgery at an outside institution, the component was unable to be located. Subsequent imaging revealed marked implant migration. Computed tomography (CT)-guided needle localization was used to facilitate component removal.

CONCLUSION

In the presence of different surgical approaches, dissociated polyethylene components may migrate to anatomic compartments distinct from the approach of implantation. CT and needle localization may be used to facilitate component removal.