Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 761–767 | Cite as

Dislocations after use of dual-mobility cups in cementless primary total hip arthroplasty: prospective multicentre series

  • Ji-hyo Hwang
  • Sang-Min Kim
  • Kwang-Jun Oh
  • Yeesuk Kim
Original Paper

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of dislocation and specific complications of the dual-mobility cup.

Methods

The arthroplasties involved 167 hips in 165 patients; 51 hips (30.5%) were in men and 116 (69.4%) were in women. The active articulation E1® dual-mobility cup (Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) was used, and the surgical approach was posterolateral in 120 hips and anterolateral in 47 hips.

Results

Four (2.3%) dislocations were observed. Mean time of dislocation was 30.5 days post-operatively. Three incomplete reductions occurred during closed reduction. When comparing parameters between dislocation and no-dislocation groups, there were no differences in patient and surgical parameters. However, all dislocations occurred in patients with femoral neck fractures and in the posterolateral approach group.

Conclusion

The incidence of dislocation in total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a dual-mobility cup was acceptable, and cup diameter of the dislocation group was substantially larger than that of no-dislocation group. Based on clinical outcomes of our study, we conclude that the dual-mobility cup is a reliable option in THA, and further studies are necessary.

Keywords

Dislocation Hip Dual mobility cup Total hip arthroplasty 

Notes

Funding

There is no funding source.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The Human Research Ethics Committees at each institution approved the study.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ (2009) The Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91-A:128–133.  https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.h.00155 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Springer BD, Fehring TK, Griffin WL, Odum SM, Masonis JL (2009) Why Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Fails. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:166–173.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0566-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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 Arthroplast 20:11–19.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2004.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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-A:2456–2463.  https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.d.02860 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robinson M, Bornstein L, Mennear B, Bostrom M, Nestor B, Padgett D, Westrich G (2012) Effect of restoration of combined offset on stability of large head THA. Hip Int 22:248–253.  https://doi.org/10.5301/HIP.2012.9283 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lachiewicz PF, Kelley SS (2002) The use of constrained components in total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 10:233–238CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nich C, Vandenbussche E, Augereau B, Sadaka J (2016) Do Dual-Mobility Cups Reduce the Risk of Dislocation in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Fractured Neck of Femur in Patients Aged Older Than 75 Years? J Arthroplast 31:1256–1260.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.11.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boyer B, Philippot R, Geringer J, Farizon F (2012) Primary total hip arthroplasty with dual mobility socket to prevent dislocation: a 22-year follow-up of 240 hips. Int Orthop 36:511–518.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1289-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guyen O, Pibarot V, Vaz G, Chevillotte C, Carret JP, Bejui-Hugues J (2007) Unconstrained tripolar implants for primary total hip arthroplasty in patients at risk for dislocation. J Arthroplast 22:849–858.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.11.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    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 33:927–932.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0589-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leclercq S, Benoit JY, de Rosa JP, Tallier E, Leteurtre C, Girardin PH (2013) Evora(R) chromium-cobalt dual mobility socket: results at a minimum 10 years' follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99:923–928.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2013.07.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Puch JM, Derhi G, Descamps L, Verdier R, Caton JH (2017) Dual-mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty in patients less than fifty five years and over ten years of follow-up : A prospective and comparative series. Int Orthop 41:475–480.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3325-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Prudhon JL, Verdier R, Caton JH (2017) Low friction arthroplasty and dual mobility cup: a new gold standard. Int Orthop 41:563–571.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3375-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    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 38:1125–1129.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2313-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prudhon JL, Ferreira A, Verdier R (2013) Dual mobility cup: dislocation rate and survivorship at ten years of follow-up. Int Orthop 37:2345–2350.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-013-2067-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    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 466:389–395.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-007-0047-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Philippot R, Adam P, Reckhaus M, Delangle F, Verdot F, Curvale G, Farizon F (2009) Prevention of dislocation in total hip revision surgery using a dual mobility design. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:407–413.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2009.04.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS (2004) The cumulative long-term risk of dislocation after primary Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:9–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ (2009) The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:128–133.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00155 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Clohisy JC, Harris WH (1999) Primary hybrid total hip replacement, performed with insertion of the acetabular component without cement and a precoat femoral component with cement. An average ten-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81-A:247–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harris WH (1969) 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 51-A:737–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Woo RYG, Morrey BF (1982) Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64-A:1295–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    D'Apuzzo MR, Koch CN, Esposito CI, Elpers ME, Wright TM, Westrich GH (2016) Assessment of Damage on a Dual Mobility Acetabular System. J Arthroplast 31:1828–1835.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boyer B, Neri T, Geringer J, Di Iorio A, Philippot R, Farizon F (2017) Understanding wear in dual mobility total hip replacement: first generation explant wear patterns. Int Orthop 41:529–533.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3362-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gaudin G, Ferreira A, Gaillard R, Prudhon JL, Caton JH, Lustig S (2017) Equivalent wear performance of dual mobility bearing compared with standard bearing in total hip arthroplasty: in vitro study. Int Orthop 41:521–527.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3346-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Plummer DR, Haughom BD, Della Valle CJ (2014) Dual mobility in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 45:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2013.08.004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bousquet G, Gazielly DF, Debiesse JL (1985) The ceramic coated cementless total hip arthroplasty: Basic concepts and surgical technique. J Orthopaedic Surg Tech 1:15–28Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    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 471:3891–3900.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-2929-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hamadouche M, Arnould H, Bouxin B (2012) Is a cementless dual mobility socket in primary THA a reasonable option? Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:3048–3053.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2395-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vielpeau C, Lebel B, Ardouin L, Burdin G, Lautridou C (2011) The dual mobility socket concept: experience with 668 cases. Int Orthop 35:225–230.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1156-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ferreira A, Prudhon JL, Verdier R, Puch JM, Descamps L, Dehri G, Remi M, Caton JH (2017) Contemporary dual-mobility cup regional and private register: methodology and results. Int Orthop 41:439–445.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3405-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liao L, Zhao Jm SW, Xf D, Lj C, Luo S (2012) A meta-analysis of total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty outcomes for displaced femoral neck fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132:1021–1029.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1485-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yu L, Wang Y, Chen J (2012) Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:2235–2243.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2293-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Burgers PTPW, Van Geene AR, Van den Bekerom MPJ, Van Lieshout EMM, Blom B, Aleem IS, Bhandari M, Poolman RW (2012) Total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures in the healthy elderly: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized trials. Int Orthop 36:1549–1560.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1569-7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Brooks PJ (2013) Dislocation following total hip replacement: causes and cures. Bone Joint J 95-B:67–69.  https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.95b11.32645 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Masonis JL, Bourne RB (2002) Surgical approach, abductor function, and total hip arthroplasty dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 405:46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Soong M, Rubash HE, Macaulay W (2004) Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:314–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Roberts JM, Fu FH, McClain EJ, Ferguson AB Jr (1984) A comparison of the posterolateral and anterolateral approaches to total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 187:205–210Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Enocson A, Hedbeck CJ, Tidermark J, Pettersson H, Ponzer S, Lapidus LJ (2009) Dislocation of total hip replacement in patients with fractures of the femoral neck. Acta Orthop 80:184–189.  https://doi.org/10.3109/17453670902930024 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Philippot R, Boyer B, Farizon F (2013) Intraprosthetic dislocation: a specific complication of the dual-mobility system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:965–970.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2639-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Malatray M, Roux JP, Gunst S, Pibarot V, Wegrzyn J (2017) Highly crosslinked polyethylene: a safe alternative to conventional polyethylene for dual mobility cup mobile component. A biomechanical validation. Int Orthop 41:507–512.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3334-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Oral E, Muratoglu OK (2011) Vitamin E diffused, highly crosslinked UHMWPE: a review. Int Orthop 35:215–223.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1161-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gangnam Sacred Heart HospitalHallym University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic SurgerySeoul Medical CenterSeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Orthopedic Surgery, KonKuk University Medical CenterKonKuk University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Orthopedic Surgery, School of MedicineHanyang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations