Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intra-prosthetic dislocation of dual-mobility cups after total hip arthroplasty: potential causes from a clinical and biomechanical perspective

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Recurrent dislocation of total hip arthroplasty is a frequent indication for revision surgery. Hip joint stability depends on implant design, cup position and crucially on femoral head diameter. Due to an effective ultra-large diameter femoral head, dual-mobility cups are considered an attractive solution to prevent dislocation in unstable conditions. Although patients obviously benefit for many years in terms of mobility and pain, an increase of intra-prosthetic dislocation reports using dual-mobility cups has been recently observed. However, the failure mechanism of this implant-specific complication, which is characterized by the loss of the positive-locking between the femoral head and the mobile liner, is not yet completely understood.

Methods

A comprehensive search was performed with the PubMed database and a search engine to overview this topic and to identify potential causes for this implant-specific failure from a clinical and biomechanical perspective.

Results

Peri-operative findings indicate extensive fibrosis at the large articulation as well as cup loosening as potential causes. In addition, current research has shown that the failure mechanism is affected by the surface topography of the femoral neck and in particular by the design of the mobile liner.

Discussion

In clinical practice it is necessary to differentiate a classic dislocation between the mobile liner and the metallic shell from an intra-prosthetic dislocation between the femoral head and the liner.

Conclusion

Due to the increasing popularity of dual-mobility cups in total hip arthroplasty, the understanding of which implant-specific features or tissue response may increase the risk of intra-prosthetic dislocation is of major importance for reduced revision rates by using optimized surgical techniques and implant designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (2011) Annual report. http://www.shpr.se/en/Publications/DocumentsReports.aspx . Accessed 22 September 2015

  2. Ulrich SD, Seyler TM, Bennett D et al (2008) Total hip arthroplasties: what are the reasons for revision? Int Orthop 32(5):597–604

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Abu-Amer Y, Darwech I, Clohisy JC (2007) Aseptic loosening of total joint replacements: mechanisms underlying osteolysis and potential therapies. Arthritis Res Ther 9 Suppl 1:S6

  4. Prudhon JL, Steffann F, Ferreira A, Verdier R, Aslanian T, Caton J (2014) Cementless dual-mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty revision. Int Orthop 38(12):2463–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bader R, Scholz R, Steinhauser E, Zimmermann S, Busch R, Mittelmeier W (2004) The influence of head and neck geometry on stability of total hip replacement: a mechanical test study. Acta Orthop Scand 75(4):415–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kluess D, Martin H, Mittelmeier W, Schmitz KP, Bader R (2007) Influence of femoral head size on impingement, dislocation and stress distribution in total hip replacement. Med Eng Phys 29(4):465–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Blom AW, Rogers M, Taylor AH, Pattison G, Whitehouse S, Bannister GC (2008) Dislocation following total hip replacement: the Avon orthopaedic centre experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 90(8):658–62

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Mahomed NN, Barrett JA, Katz JN, Phillips CB, Losina E, Lew RA et al (2003) Rates and outcomes of primary and revision total hip replacement in the United States medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(1):27–32

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Burroughs BR, Hallstrom B, Golladay GJ, Hoeffel D, Harris WH (2005) Range of motion and stability in total hip arthroplasty with 28-, 32-, 38-, and 44-mm femoral head sizes. J Arthroplasty 20(1):11–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. D’Lima DD, Urquhart AG, Buehler KO, Walker RH, Colwell CW (2000) The effect of the orientation of the acetabular and femoral components on the range of motion of the hip at different head-neck ratios. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(3):315–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bader R, Steinhauser E, Scholz R, Simnacher M, Mittelmeier W (2004) Experimental analysis of neutral, asymmetric and constraint liners for total hip replacement: Investigation of range of motion and stability against joint instability. Z Orthop Grenzgeb 142(5):577–85

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Guyen O, Pibarot V, Vaz G, Chevillotte C, Bejui-Hugues J (2009) Use of a dual mobility socket to manage total Hip arthroplasty instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(2):465–72

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Krein SW, Chao EY (1984) Biomechanics of bipolar hip endoprostheses. J Orthop Res 2(4):356–68

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Thomsen M, Breusch SJ, Schneider U, Kubein-Meesenburg D, Nägerl H (2001) Developments in hip hemi-arthroplasty and theory of the link-chain dimeric hip prosthesis. Unfallchirurg 104(11):1061–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fabry C, Woernle C, Bader R (2014) Self-centering dual-mobility total hip systems: prediction of relative movements and realignment of different intermediate components. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 228(5):477–485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen QS, Lazennec JY, Guyen O, Kinbrum A, Berry DJ, An KN (2005) Technical note: validation of a motion analysis system for measuring the relative motion of the intermediate component of a tripolar total hip arthroplasty prosthesis. Med Eng Phys 27(6):505–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Philippot R, Camilleri JP, Boyer B, Adam P, Farizon F (2009) 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 33(4):927–32

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Hamadouche M, Biau DJ, Huten D, Musset T, Gaucher F (2010) The Use of a cemented dual mobility socket to treat recurrent dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(12):3248–54

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Vielpeau C, Lebel B, Ardouin L, Burdin G, Lautridou C (2011) The dual mobility socket concept: experience with 668 cases. Int Orthop 35(2):225–30

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Prudhon JL, Ferreira A, Verdier R (2013) Dual mobility cup: dislocation rate and survivorship at ten years of follow-up. Int Orthop 37(12):2345–50

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 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 whether a dual mobility cup has a decreased dislocation risk. Int Orthop 38(6):1125–9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Leclercq S, Benoit JY, de Rosa JP, Tallier E, Leteurtre C, Girardin PH (2013) Evora® chromium-cobalt dual mobility socket: results at a minimum 10 years’ follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(8):923–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Odland AN, Sierra RJ (2014) Intraprosthetic dislocation of a contemporary dual-mobility design used during conversion THA. Orthopedics 37(12):e1124–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Langlois J, El Hage S, Hamadouche M (2014) Intraprosthetic dislocation: a potentially serious complication of dual mobility acetabular cups. Skelet Radiol 43(7):1013–6

    Google Scholar 

  25. Philippot R, Boyer B, Farizon F (2013) Intraprosthetic dislocation: a specific complication of the dual-mobility system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(3):965–70

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Combes A, Migaud H, Girard J, Duhamel A, Fessy MH (2013) Low rate of dislocation of dual-mobility cups in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(12):3891–900

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Lecuire F, Benareau I, Rubini J, Basso M (2004) Intra-prosthetic dislocation of the bousquet dual mobility socket. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 90(3):249–55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hamadouche M, Arnould H, Bouxin B (2012) Is a cementless dual mobility socket in primary THA a reasonable option? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(11):3048–53

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Massin P, Orain V, Philippot R, Farizon F, Fessy MH (2012) Fixation failures of dual mobility cups: a mid-term study of 2601 hip replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(7):1932–40

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Lautridou C, Lebel B, Burdin G, Vielpeau C (2008) Survival of the cementless bousquet dual mobility cup: minimum 15-year follow-up of 437 total hip arthroplasties. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94(8):731–9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mertl P, Combes A, Leiber-Wackenheim F, Fessy MH, Girard J, Migaud H (2012) Recurrence of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty revision using dual mobility cups was rare in 180 hips followed over 7 years. HSS J 8(3):251–6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee HH, Lo YC, Lin LC, Wu SS (2008) Disassembly and dislocation of a bipolar hip prosthesis. J Formos Med Assoc 107(1):84–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Banka TR, Ast MP, Parks ML (2014) Early intraprosthetic dislocation in a revision dual-mobility hip prosthesis. Orthopedics 37(4):e395–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. De Martino I, Triantafyllopoulos GK, Sculco PK, Sculco TP (2014) Dual mobility cups in total hip arthroplasty. World J Orthop 5(3):180–7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Langlais FL, Ropars M, Gaucher F, Musset T, Chaix O (2008) Dual mobility cemented cups have low dislocation rates in THA revisions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(2):389–95

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Fabry C, Kaehler M, Herrmann S, Woernle C, Bader R (2014) Dynamic behavior of tripolar hip endoprostheses under physiological conditions and their effect on stability. Med Eng Phys 36(1):65–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, University Medicine Rostock, Biomechanics and Implant Technology Research Laboratory, Doberaner Str. 142, 18057, Rostock, Germany

    Christian Fabry & Rainer Bader

  2. Department of Orthopaedic and Reconstructive Surgery, Hopital Cochin (AP-HP), Université Paris Descartes, 27 Rue du Faubourg St Jacques, 75014, Paris, France

    Jean Langlois & Moussa Hamadouche

Authors
  1. Christian Fabry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jean Langlois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Moussa Hamadouche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rainer Bader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Fabry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fabry, C., Langlois, J., Hamadouche, M. et al. Intra-prosthetic dislocation of dual-mobility cups after total hip arthroplasty: potential causes from a clinical and biomechanical perspective. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 40, 901–906 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3000-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3000-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation