The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00264-016-3381-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common reason for revision. The last decade fostered a significant increase in the use of dual-mobility cups (DMCs). Here we report our study on the short-term survival rate of a cemented DMC reported to the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) compared with other cemented designs used in first-time revision due to dislocation.
During 2005–2015, 984 first-time revisions for dislocation were reported to SHAR. In 436 of these cases a cemented dual articular cup was used. During the same time period, 355 revisions performed with a standard cemented cup (femoral head size 28–36 mm) were reported to the SHAR. Patients receiving a DMC were slightly older (75 years, p = 0.005). Re-revision for all reasons was used as primary endpoint. We also anlaysed risk for re-revision of the acetabular component and re-revision due to dislocation. Kaplan–Meier implant survival and a Cox regression analyses adjusted for age and gender were performed.
Implant survival at 4 years for all reasons (91% ± 3.7% vs 86% ± 4.1%, p = 0.02), and especially for re-operation because of dislocation, favours the DMC group (96% ± 3.0% vs 92% ± 3.3%, p = 0.001).
Our findings indicate that use of a cemented DMC reduces the short- to mid-term risk of a second revision in first-time revisions compared with classic cup designs. Longer follow-up is needed to establish any long-term clinical advantages when DMCs are used in revisions performed due to dislocation.
Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Annual Report. Adelaide:AOA; 2015. 2015 [cited 2016 31 October 2016].
Garellick, G., Kärrholm, J., Lindahl, H., Malchau, H., Rogmark, C., Rolfson, O. The Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Annual Report 2014. 2015 [cited 2016 31 October 2016].
Andersen AV, Kjersgaard AG, Solgaard S (2013) Trilogy-constrained acetabular component for recurrent dislocation. ISRN Orthop, 2013: 629201
Duffy GP, Wannomae KK, Rowell SL, Muratoglu OK (2009) Fracture of a cross-linked polyethylene liner due to impingement. J Arthroplasty 24(1):158 e15–9 CrossRef
Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS (2005) Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(11):2456–63 PubMed
Jameson SS, Lees D, James P, Serrano-Pedraza I, Partington PF, Muller SD, Meek RM, Reed MR (2011) Lower rates of dislocation with increased femoral head size after primary total hip replacement: a five-year analysis of NHS patients in England. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 93(7):876–80 CrossRef
Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Greidanus NV, Bohm ER, Petrak MJ, Della Valle CJ, Gross AE (2012) The Frank Stinchfield Award: Dislocation in revision THA: do large heads (36 and 40 mm) result in reduced dislocation rates in a randomized clinical trial? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(2):351–6 CrossRefPubMed
Leiber-Wackenheim F, Brunschweiler B, Ehlinger M, Gabriona A, Mertla P (2011) Treatment of recurrent THR dislocation using of a cementless dual-mobility cup: A 59 cases series with a mean 8 years’ follow-up. Elsevier, 97: 8–13
Caton JH, Prudhon JL, Ferreira A, Aslanian T, Verdier R (2014) A comparative and retrospective study of three hundred and twenty primary Charnley type hip replacements with a minimum follow up of ten years to assess wether a dual mobility cup has a decreased dislocation risk. Int Orthop 38(6):1125–1129 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Leclercq S, El Blidi S, Aubriot J (1995) Traitement de la luxation récidivante de prothèse totale de hanche par le cotyle de Bousquet. A propos de 13 cas. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 81(5):389–394 PubMed
Soderman P, Malchau H, Herberts P, Zügner R, Regnér H, Garellick G (2001) Outcome after total hip arthroplasty: Part II. Disease-specific follow-up and the Swedish National Total Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 72(2):113–119 CrossRef
Timperley AJ, Biau D, Chew D, Whitehouse SL (2016) Dislocation after total hip replacement: there is no such thing as a safe zone for socket placement with the posterior approach. Hip Int
Ritter MA (1995) The Cemented Acetabular Component of a Total Hip Replacement: All Polyethylene Versus Metal Backing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 311:69–75
Peraldi P, Vandenbussche E, Augereau B (1996) Bad clinical results of cemented caps with metal-backed acetabular components. 124 cases with 21 months follow-up. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 83(6):561–565
- Use of dual-mobility cup in revision hip arthroplasty reduces the risk for further dislocation: analysis of seven hundred and ninety one first-time revisions performed due to dislocation, reported to the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie
e.Med Kampagnen-Visual, Mail Icon II