Dual mobility cups have two points of articulation, one between the shell and the polyethylene (external bearing) and one between the polyethylene and the femoral head (internal bearing). Movement occurs at the inner bearing; the outer bearing only moves at extremes of movement. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a cause of much morbidity and its treatment has significant cost implications. Dual mobility cups provide an increased range of movement and a may reduce the risk of dislocation. . This paper reviews the use of these cups in THA, particularly where stability is an issue. Dual mobility cups may be of benefit in primary THA in patients at a high risk of dislocation, such as those who are older with increased comorbidities and a higher American Association of Anesthesiology grade and those with a neuromuscular disease. They may be used at revision surgery where the risk of dislocation is high, such as in patients with many prior dislocations, or those with abductor deficiency. They may also be used in THA for displaced fractures of the femoral neck, which has a notoriously high rate of dislocation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):60–3

Introduction. Reoperations to manage unstable total hip arthroplasty are reported with a high failure rate. The dual mobility cup (figure 1) (mobile polyethylene component between the prosthetic head and the outer metal shell) is a useful option in such cases. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the clinical and radiologic features associated with the dual mobility cup. Materials and Methods. Fifty one unstable total hip arthroplasties (32 females, 19 males) were revised using a dual mobility socket at our institution between March 2000 and February 2005. Mean age at reoperation was 67 year old (range, 35 to 98). The outcome of the revision procedure was assessed using the Harris Hip Score, and complications were determined by detailed review of the patient's records. Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the involved joint were reviewed to assess the position of the prosthesis and to look for osteolysis and signs of loosening of the implant. Results. Mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2 to 6.7). At last review 4 patients had died and one was lost to follow up. Postoperatively there was a significant improvement of the Harris Hip Score. Fifty patients (98%) had no further episodes of dislocation. There were 3 revisions for deep infection, and 2 for dissociation of the bipolar component. No cup required a revision for aseptic loosening. No radiolucent lines around the components and no osteolysis were observed at latest follow up. Conclusion. The dual mobility cup is a highly effective option to manage unstable total hip arthroplasty. Unlike constrained devices, such components provide encouraging radiologic results regarding the potential for loosening and osteolysis. Longer follow up is needed to confirm these results

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

Aims. Dislocation remains a significant complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA), being the third leading indication for revision. We present a series of acetabular revision using a dual mobility cup (DMC) and compare this with our previous series using the posterior lip augmentation device (PLAD). Methods. A retrospective review of patients treated with either a DMC or PLAD for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA was performed. They were identified using electronic patient records (EPR). EPR data and radiographs were evaluated to determine operating time, length of stay, and the incidence of complications and recurrent dislocation postoperatively. Results. A total of 28 patients underwent revision using a DMC for dislocation following Charnley THA between 2013 and 2017. The rate of recurrent dislocation and overall complications were compared with those of a previous series of 54 patients who underwent revision for dislocation using a PLAD, between 2007 and 2013. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean distribution of sex or age between the groups. The mean operating time was 71 mins (45 to 113) for DMCs and 43 mins (21 to 84) for PLADs (p = 0.001). There were no redislocations or revisions in the DMC group at a mean follow-up of 55 months (21 to 76), compared with our previous series of PLAD which had a redislocation rate of 16% (n = 9) and an overall revision rate of 25% (n = 14, p = 0.001) at a mean follow-up of 86 months (45 to 128). Conclusion. These results indicate that DMC outperforms PLAD as a treatment for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA. This should therefore be the preferred form of treatment for these patients despite a slightly longer operating time. Work is currently ongoing to review outcomes of DMC over a longer follow-up period. PLAD should be used with caution in this patient group with preference given to acetabular revision to DMC. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):423–425

BACKGROUND PURPOSES. dislocation is a classical complication in total hip arthroplasty (THA) revision. Cup fixation is the second concern. Since 1998 we routinely use cementless Dual mobility cup (DMC) in revision surgery. In order to know outcomes at 2 years, we followed a prospective series of 78 patients treated in our institution. Purpose is to demonstrate that DMC used in revision THA is safe as regards dislocation risk and bone fixation. MATERIAL METHODS. from January 2010 to January 2012 we collected cohort of 79 cases on 78 patients. Patients have been followed with a clinical and radio graphical standard examination. Mean delay between index surgery and revision was 12,9 years. Mean age at revision was 75,5 years. Two different types of DMC were used: standard DMC in 68 cases. In severe bone loss, a specific revision cup was used in 11 cases. RESULTS. at 2 years follow up, 65 patients have been reviewed. 5 patients are definitely lost to follow up. 8 patients deceased. One patient dislocated her hip at 1 month. Two early mechanical failures occurred. DISCUSSION. purpose of this short term follow up study is to emphasize low risk of dislocation and trustable fixation of a cementless DMC used in revision THA. THA. Instability is the leading cause of failure. In our series dislocation rate is 1,2%‥ 2 patients presented an early mechanical cup failure (2.5%). CONCLUSION. considering outcomes of this series, we may assess that in in THA revision surgery, DMC can be recommended

Purpose of the study: The concept introduced by Gilles Bousquet is an effective arm against dislocation of total hip arthroplasty (THA), as has been demonstrated in clinical series with a long follow-up. There remain certain questions concerning wear of dual mobility cups. We propose a radiostereometrical analysis (RSA) of femoral head migration in this type of implant. Our objective was to establish an accurate measurement and determine the intra- and interobserver variabilities. Material and methods: A THA model was implanted and loaded with a simulator. Penetration of the implants was measured using a specially designed polyethylene insert with increasingly concentric wear (from 0, 0.25, 0.5 to 0.75 mm). Three investigators analysed (7 times in a double-blind protocol) the RSA images of these four inserts. The investigators were an expert (I), well-trained (II), naive (III). The accuracy of the measurement as well as the intra- and interobserver variabilities were determined using the root mean square (RMS) method, the interclass coefficient of correlation (ICC), the Bland and Altman analyses, and weighted Kappa analysis. Results: Regarding accuracy, the RMS was 0.0388 [CI95: 0.02266–0.05564]. The mean error for preworn inserts was respectively 0.022mm (for 0.25mm prewear), 0.59mm (for 0.5mm), and 0.022mm (for 0.75mm). The intra-observer ICC was 0.9714 [0.9028–0.9918] for investigator I. The interobserver ICCs between investigators I and II and between I and III were respectively 0.943 and 0.968. The weighted kappa coefficients between I and II and between I and III were 0.827 and 0.849. The Bland and Altman analysis confirmed these results. Discussion: Several RSA protocols could be designed to measure wear of the dual mobility cup. We chose detection of the wear pattern instead of the tantalum beads method. Our protocol, using a simple geometric model and not the manufacturers CAD files, showed an accuracy comparable with manufacturing tolerances with low variability. Conclusion: This study validated our measurement method, a prerequisite for a randomized multicentric study which has been initiated to compare, by RSA, penetration of the head into the double mobility insert versus a fixed insert

Treatment of recurrent dislocation: approximately: 1/3 of failures (probably higher in the absence of a clear curable cause). In the US: most popular treatment option: constrained liners with high redislocation and loosening rates in most reports. Several interfaces leading to various modes of failures. In Europe: dual mobility cups (or tripolar unconstrained): first design Gilles Bousquet 1976 (Saint Etienne, France), consisting of a metal shell with a highly polished inner surface articulating with a mobile polyethylene insert (large articulation). The femoral head is captured into the polyethylene (small articulation) using a snap fit type mechanism leading to a large effective unconstrained head inside the metal cup. With dual mobility, most of the movements occur in the small articulation therefore limiting wear from the large polyethylene on metal articulation. Contemporary designs include: CoCr metal cup for improved friction, outer shell coated with titanium and hydroxyapatite, possible use of screws to enhance primary stability (revision), cemented version in case of major bone defect requiring bone reconstruction. Increased stability obtained through an ultra-large diameter effective femoral head increasing the jumping distance. Dual mobility in revision for recurrent dislocation provided hip stability in more than 94% of the cases with less than 3% presenting redislocation up to 13-year follow-up. A series from the UK concerning 115 revisions including 29 revisions for recurrent dislocation reported 2% dislocation in the global series and 7% re-dislocation in patients revised for instability. A recent report of the Swedish hip arthroplasty register including 228 patients revised for recurrent dislocation showed 99% survival with revision for dislocation as the endpoint and 93% with revision for any reason as the endpoint. One specific complication of dual mobility sockets: intra-prosthetic dislocation (ie: dislocation at the small articulation): often asymptomatic or slight discomfort, eccentration of the neck on AP radiograph, related to wear and fatigue of the polyethylene rim at the capturing are through aggressive stem neck to mobile polyethylene insert contact (3rd articulation). Risk factors include: large and aggressive femoral neck design implants, small head/neck ratio, skirted heads, major fibrosis and periprosthetic ossifications. Current (over ?) use in France: 30% of primary THA, 60% in revision THA. Proposed (reasonable) indications: primary THA at high risk for dislocation, revision THA for instability and/or in case of abductors deficiency, Undisputed indication: recurrent dislocation

Introduction. Polyethylene (PE) wear is clearly linked to total hip arthroplasty (THA) failure, leading to osteolysis and decreasing survivorship rates. Dual mobility cups (DMC) are widely used to prevent or treat THA instability. However some studies have pointed PE wear risk as a “dual wear” risk. Hip wear simulation is usually used to understand factors influencing wear and to differentiate design, PE types and materials performances. To date, few works have been published studying dual mobility insert wear. Objectives. Our objective was to evaluate wear of DMC with comparison with a fixed single articulating hip design and to measure wear under same conditions (loading cycle, temperature, sterilization, material and surface roughness). Methods. The test bench includes one station for a control sample and one for dynamic test. Those are driven independently one from the other. Two electrical actuators applied the forces and two forces sensors putted on the fixing plate of the acetabular part gave the corresponding values. On the dynamic station, the angular movements are generated by an electric motor. Sleeves are installed on the bowls containing the testing liquid and on the supports of acetabular parts, in order to get a tight volume that excludes contaminant particles. Wear is measured by a gravimetric method. The simulator is stopped and implants have been removed from the simulators in order to achieve weighting and observations at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 millions cycles. At the end, the sample PE insert and the control one are removed from their cup in the aim to measure the mass loss. Results. Under same conditions the gravimetric wear and the linear penetration of the head are perfectly comparable between a conventional and a dual mobility cup. Conclusion. In vitro, DMC wear is equal or less important than a standard single fixed cup and volumetric wear is lower than published data. Wear of the two joints of a DMC is not increased thanks to the recruitment phenomenon and the freedom induced by the concept

The benefit of dual mobility cup (DMC) for primary total hip arthroplasties (THA) is still controversial. This study aimed to compare 1) the complications rate, 2) the revisions rate, 3) the survival rate after monobloc DMC compared to large femoral heads (LFH) in primary THA. Between 2010 and 2019, 2,075 primary THA using cementless DMC or LFH were included. Indications for DMC were patients older than 70 years old or with high risk of dislocation. Every other patient received a LFH. Exclusion criteria were cemented implants, femoral neck fracture, a follow-up of less than one year. 1,940 THA were analyzed: 1,149 DMC (59.2%), 791 LFH (40.8%). The mean age was 73 ±9.2 years old in DMC group and 57 ±12 in LFH group. The complications and the revisions have been assessed retrospectively. The mean follow-up was 41.9 months ±14 [12–134]. There were significantly fewer dislocations in DMC group (n=2; 0.17%) compared to LFH group (n=8; 1%) (p=0.019). The femoral head size had no impact on the dislocations rate in LFH group (p=0.70). The overall complication rate in DMC (n=59; 5.1%) and LFH (n=53; 6.7%) were not statistically different (p=0.21). No specific complication was attributed to the DMC. In DMC group, 18 THA (1.6%) were revised versus 15 THA in LFH group (1.9%) (p= 0.71). There was no statistical difference for any cause of revisions in both groups. The cup aseptic revision-free survival rates at 5 years were 98% in DMC group and 97.3% in LFH group (p=0.78). Monobloc DMC had a lower risk of dislocation in a high-risk population than LFH in a low-risk population at the mid-term follow-up. There was no significant risk of specific complications or revisions for DMC in a large cohort. Monobloc DMC can be safely used in a selected high-risk population

Summary Statment. The dual-mobility cup seems to bring more stability without changing the gait pattern. Introduction. Dislocations and instability are among the worst complications after THA in elderly patient. Dual mobility cups seem to lower these risks. To our knowledge no study performed a gait analysis of dual cup in this group. Methods. Our team implanted 52 dual mobility cups (Gyros, de Puy J&J Corporation) before 2007. 7 hip revisions and 15 primary hips were reviewed in 20 patients. The mean age at the review was 79.8 years old. 15 died or were mentally too disabled to perform a gait analysis. 5 didn't give consent for a clinical study and 8 were not localizable. We performed a gait analysis using a non-invasive miniature sensors device (PhysilogTM) when patients walked freely on a flat ground. We compared our results to a control group of frail eldery patients of the same age who didn't sufferd of orthopedic condition and to a group of patient with a conventional THA from our institution and to the literature. The WOMAC and Harris Hip scores were also computed. Results. None of the 22 hips faced dislocation. The gait analysis showed good results that were superior to those of the control group of frail elderly and comparable to those of conventional THA. The cadence was of 100,3 steps/min, the double stance of 23,3%, the stance of 61,6%, the stride of 1,13 meters and the walking speed of 0,96 m/s. The mean HHS and WOMAC were 87,6 (51–100) and 11,3 (0–34). Conclusion. Our results at 5 years compared favorably with the current litterature. The increase of stability didn't impared the walking performances

Dual mobility cups (DMC) reduce the risk of dislocation in femoral neck fractures (FNF). Direct anterior approach (DAA), historically promoted for better stability, has been developed in recent years for better functional results. The aim of this study was to compare the early functional results of DMC in FNF by DAA versus posterolateral approach (PLA). A prospective study was conducted on a continuous series of patients who received DMC for FNF by DAA or PLA. The primary endpoint was Harris Hip Score and Parker score assessed at the first follow-up visit. Intraoperative complications were collected during hospitalization. One year clinical results and all cause revision rate were also collected. Radiographic data of cup positioning and limb length were evaluated. Fifty-two patients were included in the DAA group and 54 in the PLA group. Two patients were lost to follow-up. The mean age was 72.8 years. There was no significant difference in HHS or Parker score at 3 and 12 months follow up (p=0.6, p= 0.75). DAA was associated with more intraoperative complications with 4 fractures and 1 femoral nerve deficit (p=0.018). There were 3 revisions in the DAA group (1 infection, 1 dislocation, 1 peri prosthetic fracture) and 1 in the PLA group (infection), which was not statistically significant (p=0.34). Cup anteversion was 6° greater and inclination 9° lesser in DAA group (p=0.028, p<0.01). Results suggest that DAA does not provide any early functional benefit in THA-DMC for FNF compared to PLA. It could lead to more intraoperative complications and a higher revision rate. DAA requires an experienced surgeon and careful patient selection

Introduction. Upper femoral fractures include intra and extra-capsular fracture (ECF). For intra-capsular fracture (ICF), hemi-arthroplasty (HA) is the most commonly used treatment. Interest in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is growing because THA yields less revision (4% versus 7%) associated to better functional results despite higher dislocation rate (9% versus 3%). Regarding ECF, internal fixation is the reference treatment. THA could represent a relevant alternative. This study evaluates the efficiency of THA using dual mobility cup (THA-DMC) as treatment of these fractures specially in elderly patients. Material and method. 70 patients were operated on for upper femoral fractures with Quattro THA-DMC between May 2012 and October 2013. Minimum follow-up is one year. Seven surgeons in 4 institutions were involved. Data collected were: age, gender, type of fracture, surgical approach, mortality, revision rate and dislocation rate. Results. Seventy patients were included. 83.3 % were women. Mean age was 82.8 (51–99). 43% were ECF and 57% ICF. Postero-lateral approach represented 51% of cases, trans-trochanteric 43% and Hardinge 6%. Mortality rate was 10%. One dislocation (1.4%) occurred at one month postoperative treated by closed reduction. No revision was performed. Discussion. Even though THA is widely used to treat ICF, two recent meta-analyses concluded that THAs bring better survivorship as well as better functional results despite a higher dislocation rates. THA-DMC is a way to decrease dislocation risk as confirmed by our study. There is a lack of studies published on the treatment of ECF, precluding a proper assessment. Conclusion. Given the studies identified, the gold standard in the treatment of ICF is moving toward THA. THA-DMC could overcome the higher dislocation rate observed with standard THA

Dual mobility (DM) cups have 2 points of articulation – between the shell and the polyethylene (external bearing) and between the polyethylene and the femoral head (internal bearing). Primary motion occurs at the inner bearing while the outer bearing moves only in cases of extreme range of motion. Dislocation is a top reason for revision surgery and a major cost burden on society. Instability is also a significant problem after revision THA. While a variety of factors are important in hip stability, DM cups provide the safety of larger femoral heads in virtually all patients. These larger heads increase jump distance (the distance the femoral must travel before dislocation occurs) and they also increase ROM before impingement occurs. ROM and impingement are competing with each in primary THA. Especially in the flexible female with small bone structure, their increased ROM significantly increases the risk of impingement during physiologic activities. While not necessarily leading to dislocation, subluxation can occur resulting in pain. Further, ongoing impingement reduces the longevity of the PE. The ability to increase head size and head-neck ration with the DM cups in these patients is both an immediate and long-term advantage. PE thickness still can compromise the integrity of the liner. DM cups have thicker PE, especially in the smaller size cups than standard PE inserts. Even with the dual articulation, PE wear in DM cups are less, or at worst, equivalent to standard cups while at the same time providing adequate PE thickness for PE integrity and longevity

Mid and long-term follow-up of Charnley total hip arthroplasty (THA) demonstrated good functional results with 85% survivorship at 25-year follow-up. However dislocation still remains an unsolved problem. Dislocation may occur all along the patient and implant life. The aim of this study is to answer the question: does Dual Mobility Cup (DMC) decrease the dislocation risk? . Method. : We report comparative results at ten years of follow-up of 2 groups of primary cemented Charnley-type THA, one with a standard polyethylene cup (group 1, n=215) and the other one with a DMC (group 2, n=105). . Results. : In group 1, twenty-six dislocations (12.9%) occurred. In group 2 only one dislocation (0.9%) occurred. This dislocation was successfully reduced by close reduction, without any recurrence. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.0018). In group 1, reason for revision was recurrent dislocation in twenty one cases. Five patients have been revised for other reasons. The global revision rate was 12.9%. In group 2, two patients needed revision surgery for aseptic loosening. The global revision rate was 2.1%. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.0054). The goal was reached for the patients of group 2 who had more risks factors of dislocation (age, aetiology, ASA and Devane scores) than those of group 1. When using a DMC, we observed a low rate of dislocation in primary THA (0.9%). This surgical choice seems to be a secure and effective technique in Charnley-type THA, especially in a high risk population

Dual mobility components for total hip arthroplasty provide for an additional articular surface, with the goals of improving range of motion, jump distance, and overall stability of the prosthetic hip joint. A large polyethylene head articulates with a polished metal acetabular component, and an additional smaller metal head is snap-fit into the large polyethylene. The first such device was introduced for primary total hip arthroplasty by Bousquet in the 1970s, thus, the “French connection”. Dual mobility components have been released for use in North America over the past five years. In some European centers, these components are routinely used for primary total hip arthroplasty. However, their greatest utility may be to manage recurrent dislocation in the setting of revision total hip arthroplasty. Several retrospective series and the Swedish hip registry have shown satisfactory results for this indication at short- to medium-term follow-up times. However, there are important concerns with polyethylene wear, late intraprosthetic dislocation, and the lack of long-term follow-up data. These components are an important option in the treatment of recurrent dislocation in younger patients, revision of failed metal-metal resurfacing, and salvage of failed constrained liners. There are more recent concerns of possible iliopsoas tendinitis, elevated metal levels with one design, and acute early intraprosthetic dislocation following attempted closed reduction. However, a dual mobility component may now be the preferred solution in revision surgery for recurrent hip dislocation.

INTRODUCTION. THA as primary treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly still remains a prominent concern. Overall dislocation rate after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is reported form 1∼5%. But, it is quiet different in situation of femur neck fracture in elderly. The THA is associated with higher rates of dislocation (8%∼11%) in eldery compared to hemiarthroplasty even though THA showed better clinical and functional scores. Recently resurgence about THA using DMC comes after improvement of manufacturing technology. The aim of this prospective multicenter study is to assess the rates of dislocation and re-operation for displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly with THA with Dual Mobility Cup (DMC) and to review systematically comparison of previous reports. Up to our knowledge, this is first report from asian conutry about the clinical outcomes THA using DMC for displaced femur neck fracture in elderly. METHODS. Prospective consecutive groups of patients treated for displaced femoral neck fractures by three surgeons at each three center were included. 131 hips underwent THA with DMC for acute displaced femoral neck fracture in patients aged older than 70 years. Data regarding rates of dislocation and re-operation were obtained by review of medical records. Additionally From 2009 which the US FDA first approved the DMC, the authors searched reports regarding to THA using DMC for displaced femur neck fracture in elderly using the MEDLINE including cases series and comparative studies with bipolar hemiarthroplasty and THA. Therefore, current report was compared with previous reports. RESULTS. The reports about THA using DMC for displaced femur neck fracture in elderly were limited. Most of them comes from European countries. Comparative study with THA from Sweden reported the dislocation rate of THA using DMC with average aged 75-year is 0%. In Denmark study, the bipolar hemiarthroplasty showed 14% of dislocation rate for femur neck fracture in patient aged 75 years but, THA using DMC is 4.6%. Two cases series from French reported about 1–4% in patients aged 80 years. In our multicenter study, dislocation occurred in 6/131 hips (4.6%) treated with total hip arthroplasty using DMC for displaced femur neck fracture over 70 years older patients. Reoperations including periprosthetic fracture and fixation failure of cup were required in 1/43 (2.3%) hips treated with total hip arthroplasty using DM cup. These result is comparable to European reports. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. Our findings indicate that THA with DMC can not guarantee to prevent the dislocation for high risk elderly patients, but the overall rate of dislocation can be comparable to those of bipolar hemiarthroplasty and reduced compared to conventional total hip arthroplasty. This result might be a valuable messages for burden of the medical cost by dislocation after arthroplasty especially for older patient. Therefore, adding advnatages of THA compared with hemiarthroplasty, the THA with DMC can be a wise option for displaced femoral neck fracture in eldely. But, the randomized controlled study still is needed to clarify to confirm this findings

Dual mobility components for total hip arthroplasty provide for an additional articular surface, with the goals of improving range of motion, jump distance, and overall stability of the prosthetic hip joint. A large polyethylene head articulates with a polished metal acetabular component, and an additional smaller metal or ceramic head is snap-fit into the large polyethylene. In some European centers, these components are routinely used for primary total hip arthroplasty. However, their greatest utility will be to prevent and manage recurrent dislocation in the setting of revision total hip arthroplasty. Several retrospective series have shown satisfactory results for this indication at medium-term follow-up times. The author has used dual mobility components on two occasions to salvage a failed constrained liner. At least one center reports that dual mobility outperforms 40mm femoral heads in revision arthroplasty. Modular dual mobility components, with screw fixation, are the author's first choice for the treatment of recurrent dislocation, revision of failed metal-metal resurfacing, total hips, unipolar arthroplasties, and salvage of failed constrained liners. There are concerns of elevated metal levels with one design, and acute early intra-prosthetic dissociation following attempted closed reduction. Total hip surgeons no longer cement Charnley acetabular components, use conventional polyethylene, autologous blood donation, or a drain; now constrained components join these obsolete techniques! In 2017, a dual mobility component, rather than a constrained liner, is the preferred solution in revision surgery to prevent and manage recurrent dislocation.

In primary total hip replacements there are numerous options available for providing hip stability in difficult situations (i.e. Down's syndrome, Parkinson's disease). We have considered constrained liners in some of these cases.

However, in the revision situation in general and in revision for recurrent dislocation situation specifically it is important to have all options available including tripolar constrained liners in order to optimise the potential for hip stability as well as function of the arthroplasty. Even with the newer options available dislocation rates of higher than 10–15% have been reported following revision surgery at institutions where high volumes of revision surgery are performed. Because of the deficient abductors, other soft tissue laxity and the requirement for large diameter cups revision cases will always have more potential for dislocation. In these situations in the lower demand patient, constraint has provided excellent success in terms of preventing dislocation and maintaining implant construct fixation to bone at intermediate- term follow-up. Hence in these situations tripolar constrained liners remains the option we utilise. We are also confident in using this device in cases with instability or laxity where there is a secure well- positioned acetabular shell. We cement a dual mobility constrained liner in these situations using the technique described below.

Present indication for tripolar constrained liners: low demand patient, large outer diameter cups, instability with well-fixed shells that are adequately positioned, abductor muscle deficiency or soft tissue laxity, multiple operations for instability

Technique of cementing liner into shell: score acetabular shell if no holes, score liner in spider web configuration, all one or two millimeters of cement mantle

Introduction

The dual mobility design concept for acetabular liners is intended to reduce the risk of dislocation and increase range of motion, but the wear pattern of this design is unclear and may have implications in implant fixation. Additionally, the solid back cups do not have the option for supplementary screw fixation, providing an additional smooth articulating surface for the liner to move against. The objective of this study was to assess cup fixation by measuring implant migration. A secondary objective was to evaluate the mobile bearing motion after rotating the hip.

Aims. With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty (THA), one of the major challenges is the management of proximal femoral bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) has already been popularized for tumour surgeries. Our aim was to describe the outcome of using PFA in these demanding non-neoplastic cases. Methods. A retrospective review of 25 patients who underwent PFA for non-neoplastic indications between January 2009 and December 2015 was undertaken. Their clinical and radiological outcome, complication rates, and survival were recorded. All patients had the Stanmore Implant – Modular Endo-prosthetic Tumour System (METS). Results. At mean follow-up of 5.9 years, there were no periprosthetic fractures. Clearance of infection was achieved in 63.6% of cases. One hip was re-revised to pseudo arthroplasty for deep infection. Instability was noted in eight of the hips (32%), of which seven needed further surgery. Out of these eight hips with instability, five had preoperative infection. Deep infection was noted in five of the hips (20%), of which four were primarily revised for infection. One patient had aseptic loosening of the femoral component and awaits revision surgery. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship free of revision of any component for any reason was 72% (95% confidence interval (CI) 51.3% to 92.7%), and for revisions of only femoral component for any reason was 96% (95% CI 86.3% to 105.7%) at five years. Conclusion. Dislocation and infection remain the major cause for failure, particularly in patients with pre-existing infection. The use of dual mobility cups, silver-coated implants, and less aggressive postoperative rehabilitation regimens would possibly aid in the reduction of complications. PFA performed in patients with periprosthetic fracture seem to fair better. This study supports the judicious use of PFA in non-oncological revision hip arthroplasties, and that they be performed by experienced revision arthroplasty surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):229–235