Instability and aseptic loosening are the two main complications after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Dual-mobility (DM) cups were shown to counteract implant instability during rTHA. To our knowledge, no study evaluated the 10-year outcomes of rTHA using DM cups, cemented into a metal reinforcement ring, in cases of severe acetabular bone loss. We hypothesized that using a DM cup cemented into a metal ring is a reliable technique for rTHA at 10 years, with few revisions for acetabular loosening and/or instability. This is a retrospective study of 77 rTHA cases with severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky ≥ 2C) treated exclusively with a DM cup (NOVAE STICK; SERF, DÉCINES-CHARPIEU, FRANCE) cemented into a cage (Kerboull cross, Burch-Schneider, or ARM rings). Clinical scores and radiological assessments were performed preoperatively and at the last follow-up. The main endpoints were revision surgery for aseptic loosening or recurring dislocation. With a mean follow-up of 10.7 years [2.1-16.2], 3 patients were reoperated because of aseptic acetabular loosening (3.9%) at 9.6 years [7-12]. Seven patients (9.45%) dislocated their hip implant, only 1 suffered from chronic instability (1.3%). Cup survivorship was 96.1% at 10 years. No sign of progressive radiolucent lines were found and bone graft integration was satisfactory for 91% of the patients. The use of a DM cup cemented into a metal ring during rTHA with complex acetabular bone loss was associated with low revision rates for either acetabular loosening or chronic instability at 10 years. That's why we also recommend DM cup for all high risk of dislocation situations

Introduction:. The higher resisting torque against dislocation and the large range of motion due to the enlarged effective head diameter substantiate the use of eccentric dual-mobility cups in case of total hip joint instability [1,2]. As a result of force-dependent self-centering mechanism, an increased movement of the intermediate-component can be expected whose effect on wear propagation is unknown so far. Currently available hip joint simulators are only able to vary the load by the absolute value and not by the direction of resulting force. Therefore, the uniaxial force transmission may lead to a unique and stable alignment of the intermediate-component during testing. The purpose of this numerical study was to evaluate relative movements of the intermediate-component during daily life activities with respect to wear propagation. Method:. The numerical analysis was based on a standard dual-mobility system consisting of a polished metallic cup, a UHMWPE intermediate-component (40 mm outer diameter) with an eccentric offset of 2 mm and a 28 mm ceramic femoral head [Fig. 1]. The relative motion of the intermediate-component was affected by the geometrically generated self-centering torque (T. C. ) and the friction torque for inner (T. Fi. ) and outer (T. Fo. ) articulation around the centre of rotation Z. 1. [Fig. 2]. In order to consider lubrication conditions the lambda ratio was estimated for different daily life activities [3], including the calculation of composite roughness and minimum film thickness for a ball-on-plate configuration. The friction torque was related to the product of load (FRes), lever arm and the coefficients of friction which were determined using the equation proposed by [4]. Depending on load FRes and load orientation angle βthe equilibrium of moments around Z. 1. was established. Results:. Due to surface roughness and calculated minimum film thickness (0.1 to 0.62 μm), boundary lubrication was determined for both inner and outer articulation. The average coefficient of friction was 0.01825 for inner and 0.0751 for outer bearing. Torque patterns were obtained for different load orientation angles [Fig. 3]. In case of an angle β between 15° and 45° the friction torque dominated compared to the self-centering mechanism which resulted in a fixed intermediate-component position. Increasing the orientation angle β above 45° lead to a superiority of the self-centering effect as can be found for varus positions. Discussion:. In case of daily life activities the load vector FRes varies within the range of 30° in the frontal plane [3]. Therefore, the angle β ranges below 30° which leads to a fixed position of the intermediate-component. Consequently, the self-centering mechanism seems to have no negative influence on the wear propagation of dual-mobility cup systems. The presented numerical analysis permits a variation of implant-specific dimensions, but is limited to polyethylene wear couples

Dual mobility (DM) is an established bearing option in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). The traditional mono-block DM designs have limited ability for additional fixation, whereas the modular DM designs allow additional screw fixation but limit internal diameter and have the potential to generate metal debris. We report the early results of a CoCrMo alloy mono-block implant manufactured by additive technology with a highly porous ingrowth surface to enhance primary fixation and osseointegration.

Prospective follow-up of the Duplex^TM implant first inserted in March 2016 enrolled into Beyond Compliance (BC). Primary outcome measure was all-cause revision and secondary outcomes dislocation, peri-prosthetic fracture (PPF) and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Patients were risk stratified and all considered to be high risk for instability. Complications were identified via hospital records, clinical coding linkage using national database and via BC website.

159 implants in 154 patients with a mean age 74.0 years and a maximum F/U of 7 years. Survivorship for all-cause revision 99.4% (95% CI 96.2–99.8). One femoral only revision. Mean gain in OHS 27.4. Dislocation rate 0.6% with a single event. Patients with a cemented Polished taper stem (PTS) had a Type B PPF rate of 2.1% requiring revision/fixation. Compared to conventional THA this cohort was significantly older (74.0 vs 68.3 years), more co-morbidity (ASA 3 46.5% vs 14.4%) and more non-OA indications (32.4% vs 8.5%). Every patient had at least one risk factor for falling and >50% of cohort had 4 or more risk factors using NICE tool.

We believe our results demonstrate that risk stratification successfully aids implant selection to prevent dislocation in high-risk patients. This novel design has provided excellent early results in a challenging cohort where individuals are very different to the “average” THA patient. NJR data on DM has reported an increase in revision for PPF. A “perfect storm” maybe created using DM in high-risk falls risk population. This re-enforces the need to consider all patient and implant factors when deciding bearing selection.

A stiff spine leads to increased demand on the hip, creating an increased risk of total hip arthroplasty (THA) dislocation. Several authors propose that a change in sacral slope of ≤10° between the standing and relaxed-seated positions (ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated) identifies a patient with a stiff lumbar spine and have suggested use of dual-mobility bearings for such patients. However, such assessment may not adequately test the lumbar spine to draw such conclusions. The aim of this study was to assess how accurately ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated can identify patients with a stiff spine. This is a prospective, multi-centre, consecutive cohort series. Two-hundred and twenty-four patients, pre-THA, had standing, relaxed-seated and flexed-seated lateral radiographs. Sacral slope and lumbar lordosis were measured on each functional X-ray. ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated seated was determined by the change in sacral slope between the standing and relaxed-seated positions. Lumbar flexion (LF) was defined as the difference in lumbar lordotic angle between standing and flexed-seated. LF≤20° was considered a stiff spine. The predictive value of ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated for characterising a stiff spine was assessed. A weak correlation between ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated and LF was identified (r2= 0.15). Fifty-four patients (24%) had ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° and 16 patients (7%) had a stiff spine. Of the 54 patients with ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10°, 9 had a stiff spine. The positive predictive value of ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° for identifying a stiff spine was 17%. ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° was not correlated with a stiff spine in this cohort. Utilising this simplified approach could lead to a six-fold overprediction of patients with a stiff lumbar spine. This, in turn, could lead to an overprediction of patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility, unnecessary use of dual mobility bearings and incorrect targets for component alignment. Referring to patients ΔSSstanding→relaxed-seated ≤10° as being stiff can be misleading; we thus recommend use of the flexed-seated position to effectively assess pre-operative spinopelvic mobility

A-70-year old woman underwent uncomplicated total hip arthroplasty using a titanium modular stem with a 46mm CoCr femoral head, a titanium shell, and a metal linear (Wright Medical Technology). Eight years after implantation, she presented with a painful left hip. A pelvic radiograph revealed adequate positioning of both hip implants without any signs of wear of loosening. CT scanning confirmed the presence of a 5 × 5 cm soft tissue mass in the ilium above the cup component accompanied by the iliac fracture. The patient was diagnosed as having an adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) after a metal-on-metal THA and revision was performed. Perioperatively?tissue necrosis and partial destruction of the abductor mechanism were found in the absence of any macroscopic infection. Both the neck trunnion and bore of the head showed slight signs of corrosion. The modular neck was revised with a ceramic 28mm head and a new dual-mobility liner(Zimmer Biomet). The iliac fracture was fixed with a porous trabecular metal augment(Zimmer Biomet). The histopathology of tissue sample revealed extensively necrotic material with focal cellular areas of inflammatory cells containing macrophages and neutrophilas. Metalic debris was also scattered in the necrotic materials. After the revision, the patient was recovered without pain or dislocation, and iliac fracture was well fixed. Instability is a substantial problem in the revision of ARMD. Extensive necrosis with gross deficiency of the abductor mechanism is associated with postoperative dislocation. Revision of failed MoM THA a dual-mobility device an effective strategy

Constrained liners are a tantalizing solution to both prevent and treat instability, as they markedly increase the force needed for a dislocation to occur. They have, however, several important negatives that the surgeon must consider before entertaining their use including: Increased stresses at the implant bone interface which can increase the risk of loosening or cause catastrophic failure in the early post-operative period; Decreased range of motion with a greater risk of impingement; and Usually require an open reduction if they dislocate or otherwise fail. Given the limitations of constrained liners, we have looked to dual mobility articulations as an alternative to constrained liners in the past five years in our practice, including patients with abductor deficiency. We retrospectively compared a consecutive series of revision THA that were at high risk for instability and treated with either a constrained liner or a dual mobility articulation. Indications for both groups included abductor insufficiency, revision for instability, or inadequate intra-operative stability when trialing. Forty-three hips were reviewed in the constrained group (mean follow-up 3.4 years) and thirty-six in the dual-mobility group (mean follow-up 2.4 years). The rate of failure was compared using a Fisher's exact test with a p-value of < 0.05 considered significant. At a minimum of two years, there were 10 dislocations in the constrained group (10/43 or 23.3%) compared to 3 in the dual-mobility group (3/36 or 8.3%; p = 0.06). There were 15 repeat revisions in the constrained group (10 for instability, 4 for infection, and 1 broken locking mechanism) compared to 4 in the dual mobility group (2 mechanical failures of cemented dual mobility liners with dislocation and 2 for infection); 34.9% vs. 11.1% (p = 0.01). With repeat revision for instability as an endpoint, the failure rate was 23% for the constrained group and 5.5% for the dual mobility group (p = 0.03). Mean Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved from 45 to 76 points in the constrained liner group, and from 46 to 89 points in the dual-mobility group. Dual mobility articulations offer anatomic sized femoral heads that greatly increase jump distance, without many of the negatives of a constrained liner. While dual mobility is associated with its own concerns and problems (including intra-prosthetic dislocation and wear) our initial results suggest that they are a viable alternative to a constrained liner, even in the most challenging situations

Large studies have reported high dislocation rates (7 to 24%) following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), particularly when the revision is undertaken in the presence of pre-existing instability. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiographic outcome of 155 consecutive revision THA's that had been performed using an unconstrained dual-mobility acetabular implant. It features a mobile polyethylene liner articulating with both the prosthesis head and a metal acetabular cup, such that the liner acts as the femoral head in extreme positions. It can be implanted in either a press fit or cemented manner. Mean follow-up was 40 months (18–66) and average age 77 (42–89). Uncemented (n=122) and cemented (n=33) implants with a reinforcing cage, were used. Indications were aseptic loosening (n=113), recurrent instability (n=29), periprosthetic fracture (n=11) and sepsis (n=2). Three of the 155 cases (1.9%) dislocated within 6 weeks of surgery and were successfully managed with closed reduction. The 3 dislocations occurred in the groups revised for recurrent dislocation and periprosthetic fracture. There were no cases of recurrent dislocation and no revisions for implant failure. Despite a pantheon of options available, post-operative dislocation remains a challenge especially in patients with risk factors for instability. The use of large diameter heads is proven to improve stability but there are concerns regarding wear rates, metal toxicity and recurrent dislocation in the presence of abductor dysfunction. With constrained liners there are concerns regarding device failure and aseptic loosening due to implant overload. Our dislocation rates of 1.9% and survivorship to date compare favourably with alternative techniques and are also in line with studies from France using implants of a similar design. In our hands, where there are risk factors for dislocation, the use of a dual-mobility implant has been very effective at both restoring and maintaining stability in patients undergoing revision THA

Introduction:. Microseparation has resulted in more than ten-fold increase in ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-metal bearing wear, and even fracture in a zirconia head [1–4]. However, despite the greater microseparation reported clinically for metal-on-polyethylene wear, less is known about its potential detrimental effects for this bearing couple. This study was therefore designed to simulate the effects of micromotion using finite element analysis and to validate computational predictions with experimental wear testing. Methods:. Experimental wear rates for low and highly crosslinked polyethylene hip liners were obtained from a previously reported conventional hip wear simulator study [5]. A finite element model of the wear simulation for this design was constructed to replicate experimental conditions and to compute the wear coefficients that matched the experimental wear rates. We have previous described out this method of validation for knee wear simulation studies [6,7]. This wear coefficient was used to predict wear in a Dual-Mobility hip component (Fig 1). Dual mobility total hip arthroplasty components, Restoration ADM (Fig 1), with highly crosslinked acetabular liners were experimentally tested: the control group was subjected to wear testing using the ISO 14242-1 waveform on a hip wear simulator. The microseparation group was subjected to a nominal 0.8 mm lateral microseparation during the swing phase by engaging lateral force springs and reducing the swing phase vertical force. Results:. The wear coefficients that matched experimental wear rates for the low and highly crosslinked polyethylene liners were 4.57×10. −10. and 5.89×10. −11. mm. 3. N. −1. mm. −1. , respectively. Introducing microseparation in the conventional hip increased the wear rate by 15.59 mm. 3. /million cycles in the low crosslinked liner and by 1.12 mm. 3. /million cycles in the highly crosslinked liner (Fig 2). Discussion:. Microseparation did increase predicted wear rates for the low crosslinked polyethylene liner and supports the hypothesis that microseparation can adversely affect the wear of hip arthroplasty. However, the predicted and experimental increase for the dual mobility highly crosslinked liners due to microseparation was low (3.3 mm. 3. and 2.9 mm. 3. /million cycles, respectively) and below the threshold for clinical relevance. The small increase in wear rate in our study supports the high wear tolerance to wear of a dual-mobility sequentially crosslinked polyethylene liner

Dislocation remains among the most common complications of, and reasons for, revision of both primary and revision total hip arthroplasties in the United States. We have advocated identifying the primary cause of instability to plan appropriate treatment (Wera, Della Valle, et al., JOA 2012). Once implant position, leg length, and offset have been optimised and sources of impingement have been removed, the surgeon can opt for a large femoral head, a dual mobility articulation or a constrained liner. Given the limitations of constrained liners, we have looked to dual mobility articulations as an alternative, including its use in patients with abductor deficiency. We retrospectively compared a consecutive series of revision THA that were at high risk for instability and treated with either a constrained liner or a dual mobility articulation. At a minimum of two years, there were ten dislocations in the constrained group (10/43 or 23.3%) compared to three in the dual-mobility group (3/36 or 8.3%; p = 0.06). With repeat revision for instability as an endpoint, the failure rate was 23% for the constrained group and 5.5% for the dual mobility group (p = 0.03). We have also performed a systematic review of the published literature on the use of dual mobility in revision THA. Of the 3,088 hips reviewed, the dislocation rate was 2.2%, the risk of intraprosthetic dislocation was 0.3% and overall survivorship was 96.6% at 5 years. Dual mobility articulations offer anatomic sized femoral heads that greatly increase jump distance, without many of the negatives of a constrained liner. While dual mobility is associated with its own concerns and problems (including intraprosthetic dislocation and wear) our initial results suggest that they are a viable alternative to a constrained liner, even in the most challenging situations

Introduction. The causes for revision of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) are various and quite well known. The developing use of dual-mobility THA (DM-THA) seems a relevant option to decrease the risk of instability. Due to lack of long-term follow-up, this innovative retentive concept is suspected to increase the risk of polyethylene (PE) wear. The aim of the study was to analyse the causes for DM-THA revision and assess whether or not its occurrence is different from that of fixed-standard (FS) THA, particularly for aseptic loosening or wear and/or osteolysis. Materials and methods. The SoFCOT group conducted an observational prospective multicentre study from 1 January. 2010 to 31 December 2011. Inclusion criteria comprised an exhaustive collection of 2044 first-revision THAs with 251 DM-THAs and 1793 FS-THAs. After excluding complications linked to patient factors (infection and periprosthetic fractures), we performed a matched case–control study (matching ratio 1:1) comparing two groups of 133 THAs. Results. Revisions for aseptic loosening or osteolysis/wear were as frequent in DM-THA (58.7 %) as in FS-THA (57.1 %) (p 0.32); 7.5 % of DM-THAwere revised for dislocation versus 19.5 % of FS-THA (p 0.007). Discussion. Revision for osteolysis/wear and aseptic loosening were as frequent in DM-THA as in FS-THA; revision for dislocation was less frequent in DM-THA. This confirms the efficiency of the DM concept regarding the risk of dislocation. Causes for revision were different between groups, and revisions for dislocation were less frequent in DM-THA. Only prospective comparative studies could provide reliable information that may support broader use of the DM concept

While total hip arthroplasty (THA) is the most predictable and successful operation for relieving pain and restoring function in the arthritic hip, instability and dislocation have been identified as the most common cause (22.5%) of revision THA in the United States. Thus, minimizing the complications of impingement and dislocation are major goals for surgeons and implant designers. A dual-mobility (DM) socket design, where there is an additional bearing with a mobile polyethylene component between the prosthetic head and the acetabular shell, was introduced in the United States in 2010. Developed by Bousquet in 1974, the DM design has been shown to be a durable solution to hip instability after THA. The smaller inside diameter head offers the potential advantage of lower wear and the larger outside diameter head offers the potential advantage of improved stability. A review of eight studies using a DM design noted only two dislocations in 1,386 (0.1%) primary THAs. Initially, indications were advocated for patients with increased instability risk as in revision THA or THA after femoral neck fracture. However, with larger diameter metal-on-metal articulations falling out of favor, DM components are increasingly being used in younger patients. Between 2011 and 2014, the author has used DM sockets in over 400 primary THAs (age, 22–92 years). Only one dislocation was noted in this group (femoral neck fracture). One loose cup was revised. Dislocation of the smaller femoral head from the larger polyethylene head remains a theoretical risk with DM designs

Management of recurrent instability of the hip requires careful assessment to determine any identifiable causative factors. While plain radiographs can give a general impression, CT is the best methodology for objective measurement. Variables that can be measured include: prosthetic femoral anteversion, comparison to contralateral native femoral anteversion, total offset from the medial wall of the pelvis to the lateral side of the greater trochanter, comparison to total offset on the contralateral side, acetabular inclination, & acetabular anteversion. Wera et al describe potential causes of instability. These are typed into I. Acetabular Component Malposition; II. Femoral Component Malposition; III. Abductor Deficiency; IV. Impingement; V. Late Wear; and VI. Unknown. Acetabular component malposition is the most common cause of instability and so measurement of cup orientation is essential. It is well known that excessive or inadequate anteversion can lead to anterior and posterior dislocation respectively but horizontal components are also associated with posterior dislocation due to deficient posterior/inferior acetabular surface. Similarly, excessive or inadequate femoral anteversion can be easily identified on CT as can insufficient total offset of the reconstructed joint compared to the contralateral side. This can be caused by medialization of the acetabular component. Abductor deficiency can be a soft-tissue cause of instability, but it certainly isn't the only one. Knowledge of the prior surgical exposure can be instructive. Anterior exposures can be prone to deficient anterior capsule just as posterior exposures can be prone to deficient posterior capsule and short rotators, while anterolateral and lateral exposures can be associated with gluteus minimus and gluteus medius compromise. Impingement, whether involving implants, bone, or soft tissue are primarily secondary to the above factors, if osteophytes were properly trimmed at the index procedure. Correction of the incorrect variables is the primary goal of revision for instability and greatly preferable to using salvage options such as dual-mobility or constrained articulations which invoke additional concerns. Ultimately though, such salvage options are necessary if the cause of the instability cannot be determined or can be determined but not corrected. Bracing, while highly inconvenient and sometimes impractical for certain patients, still has a role in specific circumstances. Formal analysis of the unstable prosthetic reconstruction is the key to successful treatment

INTRODUCTION. Femoral stem impingement can damage an acetabular liner, create polyethylene wear, and potentially lead to dislocation. To avoid component-to-component impingement, many surgeons aim to align acetabular cups based on the “Safe Zone” proposed by Lewinnek. However, a recent study indicates that the historical target values for cup inclination and anteversion defined by Lewinnek et al. may be useful but should not be considered a safe zone. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of altering femoral head size on hip range-of-motion (ROM) to impingement. METHODS. Ten healthy subjects were instrumented and asked to perform six motions commonly associated with hip dislocation, including picking up an object, squatting, and low-chair rising. Femur-to-pelvis relative motions were recorded throughout for flexion/extension, abduction/adduction, and internal/external rotation. A previously reported custom, validated hip ROM three-dimensional simulator was utilized. The user imports implant models, and sets parameters for pelvic tilt, stem version, and specific motions as defined by the subjects. Acetabular cup orientations for abduction and anteversion combinations were chosen. The software was then used to compute minimum clearances or impingement between the components for any hip position. Graphs for acetabular cup abduction vs. anteversion were generated using a tapered wedge stem with a 132º neck angle, a stem version of 15°, and a pelvic tilt of 0°. The only variable changed was femoral head size. Head sizes reviewed were 32mm, 36mm, and a Dual-Mobility liner with an effective head size of 42mm. All femoral head sizes can be used with a 50mm acetabular cup. RESULTS. We found that the “Safe Zone” varies considerably depending on the size of the femoral head used for all subjects. A typical plot illustrating the ROM to impingement is presented in Figures 1a-1c. The area to the left of each curve represents an impingement zone for that motion, and to the right, a non-impingement zone. In all cases the non-impingement area is smaller than the Lewinnek safe zone. Motions like picking up an object and squatting had the greatest influence on impingement. CONCLUSIONS. The true acetabular target for impingement-avoidance motion is much smaller than previously believed and identifies the need to take into account the size of the femoral head to be used. This may explain why approximately 70% of dislocations have been reported to be found even when cups were placed within the Lewinnek safe zone. Certain activities, such as picking up an object and squatting reduce the size of the safe zone. This study supports the need for better patient planning and intraoperative execution for placement of the acetabular component

Introduction. Dual-mobility (DM) liners provide increased range of motion and stability. However, large head diameters have been associated with anterior hip pain due to impingement with surrounding soft-tissues, particularly the iliopsoas. Further, during hip extension the liner can get trapped due to anterior soft-tissue impingement that resists rotation being imparted to the liner from posterior stem-liner contact. Over time this can cause liner rim damage, leading to intra-prosthetic dislocation of the small diameter inner head. To address this, an anatomically contoured dual mobility (ACDM) liner was designed to reduce the volume of the liner below the equator that can interact with soft-tissues (Fig. 1). In this study, we utilized finite element analysis to evaluate tendon-liner contact pressure and tendon stresses with ACDM and conventional designs during hip extension, wherein the posterior edge of liner is in contact with the stem while the anterior edge is exposed to the soft-tissue. Methods. The average uniaxial stiffness (350 N/mm), and average dimensions (width × thickness = 14mm × 4mm) of 10 cadaver psoas tendon samples were determined in a separate study. The iliopsoas tendon was modelled as a Yeoh hyper-elastic material, and the material constants were tuned to match the experimental uniaxial test data. Cadaver specific FEA models were created for 5 specimens (10 hips) using computed tomography (CT) scans. The implant components were modeled as being rigid relative to the iliopsoas tendon. The iliopsoas tendon was modelled as extending from its insertion point on the lesser trochanter to the psoas notch on the pelvis for hip flexion angles of −15°, 0°, 15° and 30°. Appropriately sized DM components were implanted virtually for each specimen. Once placed in its proper position, the liner was rotated about the flexion axis until it contacted the stem posteriorly to represent its orientation during hip extension (Fig. 2). A 500N tensile load was applied to the iliopsoas tendon and the average/max stresses within the tendon, and average/max contact pressures between the tendon and liner were measured. Results. At all hip flexion angles from −15° to 30°, the tendon-liner contact pressure and tendon stresses were lower with the ACDM liners compared to the conventional liner. Contact pressure and tendon stress decreased for both liner designs with increasing hip flexion angle. At −15° flexion angle, the average contact pressure was 42.3% lower (0.36Mpa), and the maximum contact pressure was 45.1% (8.5Mpa lower), with the ACDM compared to conventional liner design. Similarly, at −15° flexion angle the average vonMises pressure in the tendon was 32.5% lower (14.8Mpa), and the maximum vonMises stress in the tendon was 55.7% (159Mpa lower) with the ACDM design. (Fig 3). Discussion. This study utilized cadaver specific FEA models to evaluate interaction between the iliopsoas tendon and conventional and ACDM liners during hip extension. The results showed a notable reduction in contact pressure and tendon stress resulting from reduced volume and more soft-tissue friendly profile of the ACDM design. Thus, the ACDM design may be able to reduce undesirable soft-tissue interaction with dual mobility liners

Introduction. The combination of spinal fusion and THP is not exceptional. Disorders of the pelvic tilt and stiffness of the lumbosacral junction modify the adaptation options while standing or sitting. Adjusting the cup can be difficult and THP instability is a potential risk. This study reports an experience with EOS® simultaneous measurements on AP and lateral views of spine and hips in THP patients. Material and methods. 29 men and 45 women were included in this prospective study. 21cases had bilateral THP. Patients were separated into two groups: long fusions including the thoraco-lumbar junction (group 1) and shorter fusions below L1 (group 2). We analyzed the impact of the arthrodesis on the position of the pelvis by measuring variations of the sacral slope (SS) and APP angle. Cup position was defined by coronal inclination and functional anteversion in the horizontal plane standing and sitting. We compared the data to a previous series of 150 THP patients with asymptomatic and non fused spine. Results. Table1 reports the results of the fusion series. The overall analysis of all patients demonstrates that the values for the cup functional anteversion and coronal inclination are statistically different when comparing standing to sitting (respectively p <0.01and p <0.001). The same results are obtained for SS and APP. This difference is not significant for group 1 patients. The mean range of variation for cup anteversion and inclination is 5° and 7° in the fused cases. Table 2 reports the results of the non fusion series. SS, APP and cup orientation values are statistically significant between standing and sitting. All of the values are statistically different when compared to the fused patients. The mean range of variation for cup anteversion and inclination is 11,6° and 10°. Discussion. The population of THP patients is characterized by pelvic retroversion and a significant reduction of sagittal pelvic mobility when compared to young asymptomatic individuals. Patients combining THP and spine fusion showed significant reduction of adaptation possibilities due to low variations for SS and cup orientation angles. Conclusion. This preliminary study shows the importance of planning THP taking into account not only the orientation of the spine but also its mobility for adaptation in standing and sitting positions. This is a key issue because of the growing number of elderly THP patients whose spine is degenerative or fused. A particular attention must be drawn to the cases with long fusions. The interest of a global vision of the hip-spine relationship is evident in the prevention or in management of dislocations and subluxations, and especially for the indications of dual-mobility prostheses. To view tables/figures, please contact authors directly

Introduction. The dual mobility cup was introduced in the 1970s to allow extensive range of motion associated with great stability thanks to double articulation; the first between the head and polyethylene, the second between the polyethylene and the cup. The original plan was to install a stainless-steel uncemented cup coated with a thin layer of alumina and a metal head of 22,2 mm with a polyethylene liner of first generation. Long term follow-up case studies are cited in the literature showing excellent results in reducing dislocations; however wearing and aseptic loosening are noted. The new dual-mobility cups, with reticular polyethylene and titanium and hydroxyapatite coating are proving as reliable as the older ones in terms of stability whilst they appear to be more durable. Furthermore, cemented dual-mobility cups are available, these are the topic of this study. One of the most frequent complications in the major revisions of hip replacement is dislocation. This study summarises our experience gathered in the use of dual-mobility cups during revisions of complex cases (GIR III-IV femoral or acetabular). Materials and Methods. Between July 2014 to March 2015, we have implanted 13 cemented cups with dual-mobility (Avantage® Biomet) each in different patients, who have undergone revision with severe ostheolysis (GIR III-IV femoral or acetabular). The mean age of patients was 71.5 years old (46 to 89). Indications for revisions were: aseptic loosening in 7 patients (two at third surgery), recurrent dislocation in 3 patients, 1 septic loosening, 1 revision after spacer removal e 1 post-traumatic. We used dual-mobility cup in revision surgery when implant stability could have been compromised due to difficult positioning of acetabular component in cases of walls defects or muscolar laxity. The patients have been evaluated clinically and radiographically. Results. In most difficult cases with a severe lack of acetabular walls (9 patients), and thus difficulties in correct cup positioning, we have choosen to implant a cemented cup inside a Burch-schneider® (Zimmer) ring; in those cases where acetabular morphology was still sufficient, a dual-mobility cup was directly cemented to the bone. No dislocations occured during the folllow-up, neither infections, neurological events or DVT. Discussion. Dual mobility cups are often used both as primary implant or as a revision cup. Dislocation rate in primary total hip replacement is comparable to other kind of cup normally used, while in revision cases, the incidence of dislocation decrease from a range of 5–30% to 1,1–5,5%. Our results are not yet comparable to those in literature due to short follow-up, but first impressions are comforting thanks to the lack of dislocation even in really severe cases. Conclusions. The dual-mobility cup in acetabular revisions, is one of the possible choice to keep in mind in more complex cases, where obtaining stability is difficult or impossible using other revision implants. In the literature, the available follow up are not yet long enough to be sure of implant longevity and so it's important to pay attention to use this cup in those patients with long life expectancy

Introduction. Dual-mobility (DM) liners have increased popularity due to the range of motion and stability provided by these implants. However, larger head diameters have been associated with anterior hip pain, due to surrounding soft-tissue impingement, particularly the iliopsoas. To address this, an anatomically contoured dual mobility (ACDM) liner was designed by reducing the volume of the liner below the equator (Fig1). Previous cadaver studies have shown that the ACDM significantly reduces iliopsoas tenting and trapping of the liner compared to conventional designs. We created a finite element study based on previous cadaver testing to further analyze the effectiveness of the ACDM design in reducing soft-tissue impingement, specifically the tendon-liner contact pressure and the tendon stress. Methods. The finite element model was developed within COMSOL 4.3b. The psoas tendon was modelled as a Yeoh hyper-elastic Material, which uses 3 constants (c1-c3), density (1.73g/cm3) and a bulk modulus (26GPa)[Hirokawa,2000]. In a previous, separate study, the average stiffness of 10 psoas tendon samples (5 cadavers), were measured to be 339[N/mm] in the linear region with average width and thickness of 14mmX4mm. The 3 constants were tuned to match experimental uniaxial test data, and were 5[GPa], 0[Gpa], and 46[GPa] for c1, c2, and c3 respectively. The implant components were rigidly modeled relative to the psoas. Cadaver specific CT models were used to create the FEA geometry. The insertion points for the Psoas were digitally determined on the proximal end of the lesser trochanter, and the psoas notch on the pelvis for hip flexion angles of −15°, 0°, 15° and 30°. These insertion points determined the length of the psoas and its relative position to the femoral head in 3D. The specific liner size and position for each cadaver was determined by implant planning with the CT models. In this abstract, we only present data for 2 specimens (left/right hips) with 44mm conventional DM, and 44mm ACDM, matching specimen anatomy. A 500N tensile load was applied to the psoas tendon proximally to simulate moderate physiological loading, the average/max stresses and contact pressures between the psoas and the two liner designs were determined. Results. At all flexion angles from −15° to 30°, the ACDM had lower psoas-liner contact pressure and stress compared to the conventional liner. Both contact pressure and tendon stress decreased for both liners with increasing hip flexion. At −15° flexion angle, there was an average contact pressure difference of .51MPa between the conventional and ACDM designs, or 37% decrease in pressure when using the ACDM. The average difference in tendon stress was 67.9MPa, or a 59% decrease in stress when using the ACDM (fig2, fig3). Conclusion. This study utilized cadaver specific FEA models to evaluate interaction between the iliopsoas tendon and conventional and ACDM liners. Although this abstract presented FEA models for only four hips (two specimens), the results show a notable reduction in contact pressure and tendon stress with ACDM designs. This validates findings from previous cadaver studies, suggesting that anatomically contoured designs could reduce anterior hip pain and soft tissue impingement

Introduction. The published results of the use of a dual mobility cup to prevent instability in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) have established its efficacy. However, the monoblock, porous cobalt chromium cup design makes secure fixation difficult to achieve, limiting its use in patients with significant acetabular deformity or bone loss. Recently, a modular version of the dual mobility cup was introduced, consisting of a conventional porous shell with holes to allow augmented screw fixation, a highly polished modular metal liner, and a standard bipolar femoral head. The purpose of this report is to present its various indications, the surgical technique, and report our initial results. Methods. With IRB approval and FDA clearance, we implanted the modular dual mobility (MDM) cup in 15 patients undergoing primary and 5 patients undergoing revision THA deemed high risk for instability. Indications included septic and aseptic revision surgery, developmental hip dysplasia, avascular necrosis, recurrent dislocations, hemiarthroplasty conversion to THA, periprosthetic fracture, abductor insufficiency requiring augmented repair, and hypermobility from auto-immune inflammatory disease. Surgical Technique. The acetabulum is prepared in the standard fashion for implantation of a press-fit component. After implantation and possible screw augmentation, osteophytes are removed. A modular metal liner is manually inserted into the shell by lining up tines and then impacted into place. Concentric positioning must be confirmed. After standard femoral stem preparation, a dual-mobility head with multiple neck length options is easily assembled and placed on the trunion. The hip is then located and assessed for limb length, stability, and offset. Results. In the 15 primary THAs, successful implantation of the MDM construct was accomplished without issues related to the aforementioned technique. Adjunct screw fixation was utilized in 8 patients based on initial rim fit and bone quality. In all cases, the hip had to be manually dislocated because of increased stability. There were no peri-operative complications related to the MDM. In the 5 revision cases, insertion was possible in 4 of 5 patients. In 2 cases, the MDM liner was used in previously implanted, well-fixed and positioned metal acetabular shells compatible with the MDM insert. In 2 cases, the original metal cup was replaced with a shell compatible with the MDM insert. In the remaining patient, a failed hemi-resurfacing, the use of the MDM was abandoned because of impingement and excessive lengthening causing the inner trial head to disassociate from outer trial head. Discussion. The MDM cup offers a number of important features not available on the original dual mobility designs. These include the use of: 1) a conventional shell, inserted with familiar instrumentation; 2) a shell that can be used with either a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner or the modular polished metal liner; 3) conventional cancellous screws that makes possible augmented fixation in cases of significant bone loss or acetabular deformity. These features make possible the use of the dual mobility concept without the need to add to a hospital's cup inventory. The initial results in a variety of primary and revision conditions have been encouraging