scholarly journals Early Intraprosthetic Dislocation of Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty Implant Following Attempted Closed Reduction: A Case Report

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Schirmers, MD ◽  
Ryan Horazdovsky, MD ◽  
Scott Marston, MD
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Late Complication ◽  
Polyethylene Liner ◽  
Consecutive Series ◽  
Original Design ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Intraprosthetic Dislocation

Introduced in 1974 by Bousquet, the dual-mobility bearing for use in total hip arthroplasty (THA) confers increased jump distance and improved overall stability relative to conventional THA designs [1-3]. The dual-mobility bearing incorporates a relatively small (22-28mm) metal or ceramic femoral head press fit into a larger polyethylene liner which articulates with the acetabular component. Dissociation of the femoral head from the polyethylene liner (intraprosthetic dislocation) is a known late complication thought to be related to polyethylene liner wear and has been previously reported [2-7]. In a consecutive series of 384 primary THAs employing Bousquet’s original design, there were 14 intraprosthetic dislocations over 15 years (3.6%). The authors cited polyethylene wear as causative and mean time to intraprosthetic dislocation was 8.9 years [2].

scholarly journals Dual mobility total hip arthroplasty: should everyone get one?

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 541-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
William G. Blakeney ◽  
Jean-Alain Epinette ◽  
Pascal-André Vendittoli
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Patient Selection ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Polyethylene Liner ◽  
Fixed Bearing ◽  
Hip Instability ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip

Hip instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains a major challenge and is one of the main causes of revision surgery. Dual mobility (DM) implants have been introduced to try to overcome this problem. The DM design consists of a small femoral head captive and mobile within a polyethylene liner. Numerous studies have shown that DM implants reduce the rate of dislocation compared to fixed-bearing inserts. Early designs for DM implants had problems with wear and intra-prosthetic dislocations, so their use was restricted to limited indications. The results of the latest generation of DM prostheses demonstrate that these problems have been overcome. Given the results of these studies presented in this review, surgeons may now consider DM THA for a wider patient selection. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:541-547. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180045

Intraprosthetic dislocation of dual mobility total hip arthroplasty: still occurring?

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 1097-1105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Neri ◽  
Bertrand Boyer ◽  
Jean Geringer ◽  
Alexandre Di Iorio ◽  
Jacques H. Caton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Intraprosthetic Dislocation

Intraprosthetic Dislocation of Modular Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty Components During Closed Reduction: A Report of Two Cases

2017 ◽  
Vol 01 (04) ◽  
pp. 205-210
Author(s):  
Ovninder Johal ◽  
Blake Eyberg ◽  
Russell Meldrum ◽  
J. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Closed Reduction ◽  
Hip Dislocation ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Unique Mode ◽  
Mode Of Failure ◽  
Hip Disease ◽  
Intraprosthetic Dislocation

AbstractDual-mobility bearing total hip arthroplasty offers several advantages over traditional prosthesis designs in the treatment of degenerative hip disease. Over decades of use, they have shown proven benefits in both durability and stability. However, despite their practical and theoretical advantages, they present a unique mode of failure not seen with other implants. In this report, the authors present two patients who sustained intraprosthetic dislocation of their dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty components during closed reduction of a hip dislocation.

Polyethylene Liner and Femoral Head Exchange in Total Hip Arthroplasty

2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 421-428 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen M. Petis ◽  
Bernd Kubista ◽  
Robert U. Hartzler ◽  
Matthew P. Abdel ◽  
Daniel J. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Polyethylene Liner ◽  
Total Hip

scholarly journals Metallosis after Exchange of the Femoral Head and Liner following Ceramic Acetabular Liner Dissociation in Total Hip Arthroplasty with a Modular Layered Acetabular Component

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Tomoya Takasago ◽  
Tomohiro Goto ◽  
Keizo Wada ◽  
Daisuke Hamada ◽  
Toshiyuki Iwame ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Polyethylene Liner ◽  
Metal Debris ◽  
Ceramic Fracture ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Metal Implants ◽  
Revision Tha ◽  
Ceramic Liner

The type of bearing material that should be used in revision surgery after the failure of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains controversial. In the case of ceramic fracture, the residual ceramic particles can cause consequent metallosis when metal implants are used for revision THA. On the other hand, in the case of THA failure without ceramic fracture, revision THA with a metal femoral head provides satisfactory results. We report an unusual case of progressive osteolysis due to metallosis that developed after revision THA for ceramic liner dissociation without a liner fracture performed using a metal femoral head and polyethylene liner. The residual metal debris and abnormal pumping motion of the polyethylene liner due to the breakage of the locking system or the aspherical metal shell being abraded by the ceramic head seemed to be the cause of the progressive osteolysis.

Outcomes of dual mobility components in total hip arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (1) ◽  
pp. 11-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Darrith ◽  
P. M. Courtney ◽  
C. J. Della Valle
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Aseptic Loosening ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
English Language ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Revision Thas ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Intraprosthetic Dislocation

Aims Instability remains a challenging problem in both primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual mobility components confer increased stability, but there are concerns about the unique complications associated with these designs, as well as the long-term survivorship. Materials and Methods We performed a systematic review of all English language articles dealing with dual mobility THAs published between 2007 and 2016 in the MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases. A total of 54 articles met inclusion criteria for the final analysis of primary and revision dual mobility THAs and dual mobility THAs used in the treatment of fractures of the femoral neck. We analysed the survivorship and rates of aseptic loosening and of intraprosthetic and extra-articular dislocation. Results For the 10 783 primary dual mobility THAs, the incidence of aseptic loosening was 1.3% (142 hips); the rate of intraprosthetic dislocation was 1.1% (122 hips) and the incidence of extra-articular dislocation was 0.46% (41 hips). The overall survivorship of the acetabular component and the dual mobility components was 98.0%, with all-cause revision as the endpoint at a mean follow-up of 8.5 years (2 to 16.5). For the 3008 revision dual mobility THAs, the rate of aseptic acetabular loosening was 1.4% (29 hips); the rate of intraprosthetic dislocation was 0.3% (eight hips) and the rate of extra-articular dislocation was 2.2% (67 hips). The survivorship of the acatabular and dual mobility components was 96.6% at a mean of 5.4 years (2 to 8). For the 554 dual mobility THAs which were undertaken in patients with a fracture of the femoral neck, the rate of intraprosthetic dislocation was 0.18% (one hip), the rate of extra-articular dislocation was 2.3% (13 hips) and there was one aseptic loosening. The survivorship was 97.8% at a mean of 1.3 years (0.75 to 2). Conclusion Dual mobility articulations are a viable alternative to traditional bearing surfaces, with low rates of instability and good overall survivorship in primary and revision THAs, and in those undertaken in patients with a fracture of the femoral neck. The incidence of intraprosthetic dislocation is low and limited mainly to earlier designs. High-quality, prospective, comparative studies are needed to evaluate further the use of dual mobility components in THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:11–19.

scholarly journals Hip Stability Parameters with Dual Mobility, Modular Dual Mobility and Fixed Bearing in Total Hip Arthroplasty: an Analytical Evaluation.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Tigani ◽  
Lorenzo Banci ◽  
Riccardo Valtorta ◽  
Luca Amendola
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
3D Models ◽  
Stability Parameters ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Center Of Rotation ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Press Fit ◽  
Hip Stability

Abstract Background. Use of dual mobility in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity due to the ability to reduce dislocation through increased jumping distance and impingement-free arc of movement. Recently, modular dual mobility systems were introduced to give the possibility to use dual mobility with standard metal-backed shells, however few has been studied to date regarding how jumping distance and the center of rotation changed with modular dual mobility. The objective of this study was to evaluate, through analythical simulation, how jumping distance and center of rotation change between dual mobility and standard cup with modular dual mobility or fixed bearings. Methods. 3D-models of dual mobility and standard press-fit cups with modular dual mobility or fixed bearings liners were used to simulate dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearings implant configurations, matched for same cup size, according to same cup position, different femoral head diameters. Jumping distance was calculated and center of rotation lateralization was measured for different sizes.Results. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility was reduced by -3.9mm to -8.6mm in comparison with dual mobility, from 48 to 64mm sizes. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility resulted comparable to jumping distance with polyethylene fixed bearings with Ø36mm femoral head but increased by +1.1mm and +1.4mm than jumping distance with ceramic fixed bearings with Ø36 and Ø40mm femoral heads for sizes >54mm. Modular dual mobility lateralized the center of rotation up to +2.5mm and +4.0mm in comparison with dual mobility and fixed bearings, respectively. Conclusions. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility resulted lower than dual mobility and comparable to fixed bearings polyethylene liner with Ø36mm femoral head for larger sizes. Modular dual mobility lateralized the center of rotation in comparison with both dual mobility and fixed bearings cups.

scholarly journals Hip Stability Parameters with Dual Mobility, Modular Dual Mobility and Fixed Bearing in Total Hip Arthroplasty: an Analytical Evaluation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Tigani ◽  
Lorenzo Banci ◽  
Riccardo Valtorta ◽  
Luca Amendola
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
3D Models ◽  
Stability Parameters ◽  
Dual Mobility ◽  
Center Of Rotation ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Press Fit ◽  
Hip Stability

Abstract Background. Use of dual mobility in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity due to the ability to reduce dislocation through increased jumping distance and impingement-free arc of movement. Recently, modular dual mobility systems were introduced to give the possibility to use dual mobility with standard metal-backed shells, however few has been studied to date regarding how jumping distance and the center of rotation changed with modular dual mobility. The objective of this study was to evaluate, through analytical simulation, how jumping distance and center of rotation change between dual mobility and standard cup with modular dual mobility or fixed bearings. Methods. 3D-models of dual mobility and standard press-fit cups with modular dual mobility or fixed bearings liners were used to simulate dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearings implant configurations, matched for same cup size, according to same cup position, different femoral head diameters. Jumping distance was calculated and center of rotation lateralization was measured for different sizes.Results. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility was reduced by -3.9mm to -8.6mm in comparison with dual mobility, from 48 to 64mm sizes. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility resulted comparable to jumping distance with polyethylene fixed bearings with Ø36mm femoral head but increased by +1.1mm and +1.4mm than jumping distance with ceramic fixed bearings with Ø36 and Ø40mm femoral heads for sizes >54mm. Modular dual mobility lateralized the center of rotation up to +2.5mm and +4.0mm in comparison with dual mobility and fixed bearings, respectively. Conclusions. Jumping distance with modular dual mobility resulted lower than dual mobility and comparable to fixed bearings polyethylene liner with Ø36mm femoral head for larger sizes. Modular dual mobility lateralized the center of rotation in comparison with both dual mobility and fixed bearings cups.Trial Registration. Not applicable.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document