CONSTRAINED LINERS AND DUAL MOBILITY SYSTEMS FOR PREVENTION OF INSTABILITY IN REVISION HIP ARTHROPLASTY

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Purpose. Instability is a challenging complication of revision hip arthroplasty and a frequent cause of repeat revisions. Constrained liners and dual mobility systems have gained major attention among the options of dislocation prophylaxis.

 The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of revision hip arthroplasy with use of constrained liners and dual mobility systems.

 Materials and Methods. We used DePuy Duraloc (inner diameter 28 mm) and Zimmer Trilogy (inner diameter 32 mm) systems in the constrained liners group (N 78, mean follow-up — 66.2 month, 54-82), Serf Novae and Biomet Avantage systems in the dual mobility group (N 58, mean follow-up — 17.8 month, 10-41). The two groups were comparable in age, sex and different potential dislocation risk factors, however, dual mobility cups were used more frequently in revisions due to unreduced and recurrent dislocations and in patients with the history of instability following total hip arthroplasty. There were also differences in the structure of primary diagnosis.

 Results. We observed 14 (17.9%) dislocations, 10 (12.8%) of which occurred within 2 years after surgery, and also 3 (3.8%) cases of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component, 4 (5.1%) cases of locking mechanism damage without dislocation and 8 (10.3%) cases of deep infection in the constrained liners group. In the dual mobility group we observed 3 (5.17%) large articulation dislocations, 1 (1.7%) case of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component and 4 (6.9%) cases of deep infection. The difference in dislocation rates in two groups was significant (p<0.05). The analysis of the constrained liners group revealed an increased risk of dislocation in cases when a constrained system was implanted into a retained acetabular component compared to cases with acetabular shell revision (p<0.01; RR = 7.2, 95% CI: 2.05-25.26), as well as a trend for increased risk of dislocation in cases when DePuy Duraloc liners (inner diameter 28 mm) were used compared to Zimmer Trilogy (inner diameter 32 mm) (p = 0.07; RR = 4.97, 95% CI: 1.03-24.04).

 Conclusion. Dual mobility systems proved to be more effective than constrained liners in revision hip arthroplasty although being used more frequently as a treatment rather than prophylaxis of instability. Constrained liners bear a higher risk of dislocations when implanted into retained acetabular components and when used with heads of lesser diameter.

About the authors

N. N. Efimov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Author for correspondence.
Email: fake@neicon.ru

Nikolai N. Efimov — graduate student.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

D. V. Stafeev

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Dmitrii V. Stafeev — cand. Sci. (Med.), orthopaedic surgeon, Trauma and Orthopaedic department N 7.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

S. A. Lasunskii

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Sergei A. Lasunskii — cand. Sci. (Med.), head of the Trauma and Orthopedic department N 7.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

V. M. Mashkov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Vladimir M. Mashkov — dr. Sci. (Med.), professor, leading researcher of Scientific department of Hip pathology.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

D. G. Parfeev

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Dmitrii G. Parfeev — cand. Sci. (Med.), head of the Trauma and Orthopedic department N 1.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

I. I. Shubnyakov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Igor I. Shubnyakov — dr. Sci. (Med.), chief researcher.

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg

 

Russian Federation

R. M. Tikhilov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University.

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Rashid M. Tikhilov  — dr. Sci. (Med.), professor, director ;  professor. 

ul. Akad. Baykova, 195427, St. Petersburg; 41, Kirochnaya ul., 191015, St. Petersburg.

Russian Federation

References

  1. Yoshimoto K., Nakashima Y., Yamamoto T., Fukushi J.I., Motomura G., Ohishi M. et al. Dislocation and its recur-rence after revision total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2016;40(8):1625-1630. doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-3020-3.
  2. Каминский А.В., Марченкова Л.О., Поздняков А.В. Ревизионное эндопротезрование тазобедренного сустава: эпидемиология, причины, факторы риска (обзор зарубежной литературы). Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова. 2015;(2):83-89.
  3. Прохоренко В.М., Азизов М.Ж., Шакиров Х.Х., Ступина Н.В. Анализ показаний к ревизионному эндопротезрованию тазобедренного сустава в раз­ личные сроки. Журнал теоретической и клиничес­кой медицины. 2017;(1):87-90.
  4. Gwam C.U., Mistry J.B., Mohamed N.S., Thomas M., Bigart K.C., Mont M.A., Delanois R.E. Current epi-demiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States: national inpatient sample 2009 to 2013. J Arthropasty. 2017;32(7):2088-2092. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.046.
  5. Тихилов Р.М., Шубняков И.И., Коваленко А.Н., Тотоев З.А., Лю Бо, Билык С.С. Структура ранних ревизий эндопротезирования тазобедренного сустава. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2014;(2):5-13.
  6. Springer B.D., Fehring T.K., Griffin W.L., Odum S.M., Masonis J.L. Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(1):166-173. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0566-z.
  7. Kurtz S.M., Ong K.L., Lau E., Bozic K.J. Impact of the eco-nomic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(8):624-630.doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00285.
  8. Akhtyamov I.F., Garifullov G.G., Kovalenko A.N., Kuz’min I.I., Rykov A.G. [New measures for preven-tion of intra- and postoperative complications at total hip replacement]. Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii imeni N.N. Priorova. 2010;(1):25-28. (in Russian).
  9. Kargamanov S.V., Zagorodniy N.V., Nuzhdin V.I., Buravtsova M.E. [Treatment of patients with dislocation of hip implant head]. Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii imeni N.N. Priorova. 2012;(1):30-34. (in Russian).
  10. Alberton G.M., High W.A., Morrey B.F. Dislocation af-ter revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A(10):1788-1792.
  11. Carter A.H., Sheehan E.C., Mortazavi S.M., Purtill J.J., Sharkey P.F., Parvizi J. Revision for recurrent instabil-ity: what are the predictors of failure? J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(6 suppl 1):46-52. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.021.
  12. Jo S., Jimenez Almonte J.H., Sierra R.J. The cumula-tive risk of re-dislocation after revision THA per-formed for instability increases close to 35% at 15 years. J Arthropasty. 2015;30(7):1177-1182. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.02.001.
  13. Wetters N.G., Murray T.G., Moric M. Sporer S.M., Paprosky W.G., Della Valle C.J. Risk factors for disloca-tion after revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):410-416. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2561-7.
  14. Noble P.C., Durrani S.K., Usrey M.M., Mathis K.B., Bardakos N.V. Constrained cups appear incapable of meeting the demands of revision THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(7):1907-1916. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-2212-4.
  15. Berend K.R., Lombardi A.V. Jr., Mallory T.H., Adams J.B., Russell J.H., Groseth K.L. The long-term outcome of 755 consecutive constrained acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty examining the successes and failures. J Arthropasty. 2005;20(7 Suppl 3):93-102. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.06.001.
  16. Wegrzyn J., Tebaa E., Jacquel A., Carter J.P., Béjui-Hugues J., Pibarot V. Can dual mobility cups pre-vent dislocation in all situations after revision total hip arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(4):631-640. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.034.
  17. Vasukutty N.L., Middleton R.G., Matthews E.C., Young P.S., Uzoigwe C.E., Minhas T.H. The double-mo-bility acetabular component in revision total hip re-placement: the United Kingdom experience. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(5):603-608. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B5.27876.
  18. Philippot R., Adam P., Reckhaus M., Delangle F., Verdot F.-X., Curvale G., Farizon F. Prevention of dislo-cation in total hip revision surgery using a dual mobility design. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009;95(6):704-713. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.04.016.
  19. Hartzler M.A., Abdel M.P., Sculco P.K., Taunton M.J., Pagnano M.W., Hanssen A.D. Otto Aufranc Award: Dual-mobility constructs in revision THA reduced dislocation, rerevision, and reoperation compared with large femoral heads. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(2):293-301. doi: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000035.
  20. Viste A., Desmarchelier R., Fessy M.H. Dual mobil-ity cups in revision total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2017;41(3):535-542. doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3363-4.
  21. Spaans E.A., Koenraadt K.L.M., Wagenmakers R., van den Hout J.A.A.M., Te Stroet M.A.J., Bolder S.B.T. Midterm survival analysis of a cemented dual-mobility cup combined with bone impaction grafting in 102 re-vision hip arthroplasties. Hip Int. 2018;28(2):161-167. doi: 10.5301/hipint.5000548.
  22. Lebeau N., Bayle M., Belhaouane R., Chelli M., Havet E., Brunschweiler B., Mertl P. Total hip arthroplasty revision by dual-mobility acetabular cup cemented in a metal reinforcement: A 62 case series at a minimum 5 years’ follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017;103(5):679684. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2017.04.009.
  23. van Heumen M., Heesterbeek P.J., Swierstra B.A., Van Hellemondt G.G., Goosen J.H. Dual mobility acetabular component in revision total hip arthroplasty for per-sistent dislocation: no dislocations in 50 hips after 1-5 years. J Orthop Traumatol. 2015;16(1):15-20. doi: 10.1007/s10195-014-0318-7.
  24. Plummer D.R., Christy J.M., Sporer S.M., Paprosky W.G., Della Valle C.J. Dual-mobility articulations for patients at high risk for dislocation. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31 (9 Suppl):131-135. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.03.021.
  25. Mertl P., Combes A., Leiber-Wackenheim F., Fessy M.H., Girard J., Migaud H. Recurrence of dislocation follow-ing total hip arthroplasty revision using dual mobility cups was rare in 180 hips followed over 7 years. HSS J. 2012;8(3):251-256. doi: 10.1007/s11420-012-9301-0.
  26. Chalmers B.P., Pallante G.D., Taunton M.J., Sierra R.J., Trousdale R.T. Can dislocation of a constrained liner be salvaged with dual-mobility constructs in revision THA? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(2):305-312. doi: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000026.
  27. Lange J.K., Spiro S.K., Westrich G.H. Utilizing dual mobility components for first-time revision total hip arthroplasty for instability. J Arthropasty. 2018;33(2): 505-509. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.09.029.
  28. Hamadouche M., Ropars M., Rodaix C., Musset T., Gaucher F., Biau D. et al. Five to thirteen year results of a cemented dual mobility socket to treat recurrent dislo-cation. Int Orthop. 2017;41(3):513-519. doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3343-8.
  29. Lewinnek G.E., Lewis J.L., Tarr R., Compere C.L., Zimmerman J.R. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg. 1978;60(2):217-220.
  30. Pierchon F., Migaud H., Duquennoy A., Fontaine C. [Radiologic evaluation of the rotation center of the hip]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1993;79(4): 281-284. (in French).
  31. Ranawat C.S., Dorr L.D., Inglis A.E. Total hip arthroplas-ty in protrusio aceabuli of rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg. 1980;62(7):1059-1065.
  32. De Martino I., D’Apolito R., Soranoglou V.G., Poultsides L.A., Sculco P.K., Sculco T.P. Dislocation following total hip arthroplasty using dual mobility acetabular com-ponents. A systematic review. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B (1 Suppl A):18-24. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0398.R1.
  33. Mohammed R., Hayward K., Mulay S., Bindi F., Wallance M. Outcomes of dual-mobility acetabular cup for instability in primary and revision total hip arthro-plasty. J Orthop Traumatol. 2015;16(1):9-13. doi: 10.1007/s10195-014-0324-9.
  34. Philippot R., Boyer B., Farizon F. Intraprosthetic dislo-cation: a specific complication of the dual-mobility sys-tem. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(3):965-970. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2639-2.
  35. Della Valle C.J., Chang D., Sporer S., Berger R.A., Rosenberg A.G., Paposky W.G. High failure rate of a con-strained acetabular liner in revision total hip arthroplas-ty. J Arthropasty. 2005;20(7 Suppl 3):103-107. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2005.05.005.
  36. Yang C., Goodman S.B. Outcome and complications of constrained acetabular components. Orthopedics. 2009;32(2):115-123.
  37. Chalmers B.P., Arsoy D., Sierra R.J., Lewallen D.G., Trousdale R.T. High failure rate of modular exchange with a specific design of a constrained liner in high-risk patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthropasty. 2016;31(9):1963-1969.doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.021.
  38. Тихилов Р.М., Шубняков И.И. Руководство по хирургии тазобедренного сустава. СПб.: РНИИТО им. Р.Р. Вредена, 2015. Том 2. 356 с.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c)


СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 82474 от 10.12.2021.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies