| Literature DB >> 23144637 |
Patrice Mertl1, Antoine Combes, Frédérique Leiber-Wackenheim, Michel Henri Fessy, Julien Girard, Henri Migaud.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dual mobility (DM) cups of mobile polyethylene were introduced to prevent total hip arthroplasty (THA) dislocation, but no large series with this design to treat recurrent instability have been reported.Entities:
Keywords: bearing; dual mobility; hip arthroplasty; instability; polyethylene; revision; wear
Year: 2012 PMID: 23144637 PMCID: PMC3470678 DOI: 10.1007/s11420-012-9301-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: HSS J ISSN: 1556-3316
Fig. 1DM cup: The mobile polyethylene insert is not constrained in the metal back constituting the large articulation. It is clipped over the femoral head (22- or 28-mm diameter) constituting the small articulation. Note the smooth aspect of the head–neck junction as well as the absence of an extraction hole
Fig. 2Cementless DM cup with additional screw and pegs for treating recurrent dislocation
Fig. 3Intra-prosthetic dislocation 5 years after revision of recurrent instability. The stem neck is not fully polished, which could favor polyethylene rim wear and dislocation of the small articulation. Cup exchange was needed as long as patient was referred 2 weeks after dislocation with lesions on the articulating inner wall of the metal back
Rate of osteolysis according to the shape and surface finish of the femoral neck in 145 hips at follow-up
| Osteolysis | No osteolysis | Significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shape of femoral neck ( | Flat | 3 (10.3%) | 26 |
|
| Cylindrical | 15 (18.7%) | 65 | ||
| Surface finish of femoral neck ( | Polish | 2 (4.2%) | 47 |
|
| Rough | 15 (21.4%) | 55 | ||
aValues are missing in 36 hips regarding femoral shape (11 of these had osteolysis) and in 26 hips regarding surface finish (12 of these had osteolysis)
Outcome of treatment of recurrent unstable hips revised by constrained and tripolar cup versus the DM cups in the current series
| Authors | Number of hips | Implant | Mean follow-up (years) | Recurrence of dislocation or failure of constrain mechanism | Revision for dislocation or failure of constrain mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beaulé et al. [ | 21 | Tripolar constrained | 5.4 | 9.5% | 9.5% |
| Berend et al. [ | 128 | Constrained liner | 10 | 28.9% | – |
| Bremner et al. [ | 56 | Tripolar constrained | 10.6 | 7% | 5.3% |
| Carter et al. [ | 59 | Constrained liner | 5.5 | 20% | 20% |
| Della Valle et al. [ | 41 | Constrained liner | 3.6 | 20% | 20% |
| Shapiro et al. [ | 87 | Tripolar constrained | 4.8 | 2.3% | 2.3% |
| Current series | 180 | Dual mobility | 7.7 | 6.2% | 2.1% |