1. Dual Mobility Cemented Cups Have Low Dislocation Rates in THA Revisions
- Author
-
Frantz Langlais, François Gaucher, Mickaël Ropars, Thierry Musset, and Olivier Chaix
- Subjects
Reoperation ,musculoskeletal diseases ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Prosthesis ,Asymptomatic ,Postoperative Complications ,International Hip Society Symposium ,Risk Factors ,medicine ,Hip Dislocation ,Humans ,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine ,In patient ,Aged ,Retrospective Studies ,Aged, 80 and over ,business.industry ,Incidence ,Bone Cements ,General Medicine ,Dual mobility ,Arthroplasty ,Prosthesis Failure ,Surgery ,Radiography ,Orthopedic surgery ,Traumatic dislocation ,medicine.symptom ,Dislocation ,business - Abstract
THA revisions using standard cups are at risk of dislocation (5.1% to 14.4% incidence), especially in patients over 70 years of age. Constrained tripolar cups have reduced this risk (6% incidence) but are associated with substantial loosening rates (9%). The nonconstrained dual mobility cup was designed to improve prosthetic stability (polyethylene head ≥ 40 mm diameter) without increasing loosening rates by reducing wear and limiting impingement (rotation range of 108°). We implanted 88 cemented dual mobility cups for THA revisions in 82 patients at high risk of dislocation. Average patient age was 72 years (range, 65–86 years). Eighty-five of the 88 hips were reviewed at 2 to 5 years followup. One patient (1.1%) had a traumatic dislocation at 2 years postoperatively. Two patients (2.3%) had asymptomatic early loosening and three patients (3.5%) had localized radiographic lucencies. These results confirm those with press-fit dual mobility cups suggesting a low dislocation rate at 5 years and a cup survival of 94.6%. At middle term followup, cemented dual mobility cup achieved better results than constrained cups in cases at risk of dislocation and recurrent loosening. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
- Published
- 2008
- Full Text
- View/download PDF