Abstract
Dual-mobility constructs (DMCs) are increasingly used for total hip replacement (THR) following hip fracture.
The aims of this study were to identify whether there was a difference in all-cause construct survival following THR with a DMC (DMC-THR) or with a conventional construct following hip fracture, and to identify the expected net all-cause construct survival for DMC-THR performed for hip fracture.
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies (including joint registries) including DMC-THR for hip fracture which provided Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival estimates. The primary outcome was all-cause construct survival over time.
318 papers and 17 registry reports were identified. Three studies (two registry reports and one cohort study utilising joint registry data) met the inclusion criteria, including 8,834 DMC-THRs and 63,865 conventional THRs. Upon meta-analysis, DMC-THRs had lower all-cause construct survival. Five-year KM estimates (95% confidence intervals) were 95.3% (94.6–95.9%) for DMC-THR and 96.1% (95.9–96.3%) for conventional THR.
These results suggest there is a small absolute but not clinically significant all-cause implant survival difference between THR with DMC and conventional implants following hip fracture. Given the higher comparative cost of DMC, this analysis does not support its routine use.
