Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 106-B, Issue SUPP_3 | Pages 11 - 11
23 Jan 2024
Raj S Magan A Jones SA
Full Access

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 DuplexTM 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.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXIX | Pages 18 - 18
1 Sep 2012
Middleton R Vasukutty N Young P Matthews E Uzoigwe C Minhas T
Full Access

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