Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 470, Issue 12, pp 3542–3548 | Cite as

A Dual-mobility Cup Reduces Risk of Dislocation in Isolated Acetabular Revisions

  • Roberto Civinini
  • Christian Carulli
  • Fabrizio Matassi
  • Lorenzo Nistri
  • Massimo Innocenti
Clinical Research



Isolated acetabular revisions using standard cups are at risk of dislocation. The introduction of a nonconstrained dual-mobility cup was designed to improve prosthetic stability without increasing loosening rates, but it is unclear whether the risk of dislocation is reduced.


We therefore determined: (1) if the rate of dislocation in isolated acetabular revisions is lower with a dual-mobility cup, (2) implant survival, (3) patient function, and (4) radiographic incidence of migration, loosening, and osteolysis.


We prospectively followed 33 selected patients who underwent isolated acetabular revisions with a minimum of 2 years’ followup (mean, 3 years; range, 2–5 years). In 24 patients a stainless steel dual-mobility cup was cemented into an antiprotrusio cage, whereas in nine we used a hyaluronan dual-mobility revision cup with a foramen hook and superior and posterior flanges screw fixations. We determined Harris hip (HHS) and WOMAC scores and examined radiographs for migration, loosening, and osteolysis.


There were no dislocations. Survivorship rates of the femoral and acetabular components were 97% at 5 years; the rerevision rate for any reason was 3%. At last followup, the mean HHS increased from 48 points preoperatively to 86 points. No patients had progressive osteolysis, component migration, or loosening on radiographs.


In this select group of isolated acetabular revisions, our data suggest the use of a dual-mobility cup reduced the risk of dislocation without increasing loosening from 2 to 5 years.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


  1. 1.
    Amstutz HC, Le Duff MJ, Beaule PE. Prevention and treatment of dislocation after total hip replacement using large diameter balls. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:108–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barrack RL, Mulroy RD Jr, Harris WH. Improved cementing techniques and femoral component loosening in young patients with hip arthroplasty: a 12-year radiographic review. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:385–389.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beaule PE, Schmalzried TP, Udomkiat P, Amstutz HC. Jumbo femoral head for the treatment of recurrent dislocation following total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:256–263.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blom AW, Astle L, Loveridge J, Learmonth ID. Revision of an acetabular liner has a high risk of dislocation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87:1636–1638.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brooker AF, Bowerman JW, Robinson RA, Riley LH Jr. Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement: incidence and a method of classification. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973;55:1629–1632.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen XD, Waddell JP, Morton J, Schemitsch EH. Isolated acetabular revision after total hip arthroplasties: results at 5-9 years of follow up. Int Orthop. 2005;29:277–280.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Della Valle CJ, Chang D, Sporer S, Berger RA, Rosenberg AG, Paprosky WG. High failure rate of a constrained acetabular liner in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20(7 suppl 3):103–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004; 240:205–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fukui K, Kaneuji A, Sugimori T, Ichiseki T, Kitamura K, Matsumoto T. Should the well-fixed, uncemented femoral components be revised during isolated acetabular revision? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011;131:481–485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glassman AH. Exposure for revision: total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:39–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. Modes of failure of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;141:17–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hardinge K. The direct lateral approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;64:17–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:737–755.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jamali AA, Dungy DS, Mark A, Schule S, Harris WH. Isolated acetabular revision with use of the Harris-Galante cementless component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1690–1697.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jones CP, Lachiewicz PF. Factors influencing the longer-term survival of uncemented acetabular components used in total hip revisions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:342–347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Khan RJ, Fick D, Alakeson R, Haebich S, de Cruz M, Nivbrant B, Wood D. A constrained acetabular component for recurrent dislocation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:870–876.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khan RJ, Fick D, Alakeson R, Li MG, Nivbrant B, Wood D. The constrained acetabular component for hip instability. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:377–382.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khoury JI, Malkani AL, Adler EM, Markel DC. Constrained acetabular liners cemented into cages during total hip revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:901–905.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32:46–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lachiewicz PF, Kelley SS. The use of constrained components in total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002;10:233–238.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Langlais FL, Ropars M, Gaucher F, Musset T, Chaix O. Dual mobility cemented cups have low dislocation rates in THA revisions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:389–395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lawless BM, Healy WL, Sharma S, Iorio R. Outcomes of isolated acetabular revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:472–479.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Leiber-Wackenheim F, Brunschweiler B, Ehlinger M, Gabrion A, Merl P. Treatment of recurrent THR dislocation using of a cementless dual-mobility cup: a 59 cases series with a mean 8 years’ follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011;97:8–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Levine BR, Della Valle CJ, Deirmengian CA, Breien KM, Weeden SH, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG. The use of a tripolar articulation in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:1182–1188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Livermore J, Ilstrup D, Morrey B. Effect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:518–528.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manning DW, Ponce BA, Chiang PP, Harris WH, Burke DW. Isolated acetabular revision through the posterior approach: short-term results after revision of a recalled acetabular component. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:723–729.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Massin P, Besnier L. Acetabular revision of total hip arthroplasty using a press-fit dual mobility cup. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96:9–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Massin P, Schmidt L, Engh CA. Evaluation of cementless acetabular component migration: an experimental study. J Arthroplasty. 1989;4:245–251.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McCarthy JC, Lee JA. Constrained acetabular components in complex revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;441:210–215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moskal JT, Shen FH, Brown TE. The fate of stable femoral components retained during isolated acetabular revision: a six-to-twelve-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:250–255.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Noble PC, Durrani SK, Usrey MM, Mathis KB, Bardakos NV. Constrained cups appear incapable of meeting the demands of revision THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Dec 17. [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Owens WB, Felts JA, Spritznagel EL. ASA physical status classification: a study of consistency of ratings. Anaesthesiology. 1978;49:239–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paprosky WG, Magnus RE. Principles of bone grafting in revision total hip arthroplasty: acetabular technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;298:147–155.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Philippot R, Camilleri JF, Boyer B, Adam P, Farizon F. The use of a dual-articulation acetabular cup system to prevent dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: analysis of 384 cases at a mean follow-up of 15 years. Int Orthop. 2009;33:927–932.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Philippot R, Farizon F, Camilleri JP, Boyer B, Derhi G, Bonnan J, Fessy MH, Lecuire F. [Survival of dual mobility socket with a mean 17 years follow-up] [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2008;94:43–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Poon ED, Lachiewicz PF. Results of isolated acetabular revisions: the fate of the unrevised femoral component. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:42–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schneider L, Philippot R, Boyea B, Farizon F. Revision total hip arthroplasty using a reconstruction cage device and a cemented dual mobility cup. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011;97:807–813.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tanzer M, Drucker D, Jasty M. Revision of the acetabular component with an uncemented Harris-Galante porous-coated prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:987–994.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wolters U, Wolf T, Stutzer H, Schroder T. ASA classification and perioperative variables as predictors of postoperative outcome. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77:217–222.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Civinini
    • 1
  • Christian Carulli
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Matassi
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Nistri
    • 1
  • Massimo Innocenti
    • 1
  1. 1.First Orthopaedic Clinic, Department of Special Surgical ScienceUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations