Abstract
Background
Dislocation after a primary total hip replacement (pTHR) remains a common cause of treatment failure. Constrained acetabular components (CACs) and dual mobility implants (DMIs) may mitigate this in patients at high risk of dislocation or with significant intra-operative instability. This meta-analysis evaluated the incidence and temporal trends of dislocation following implantation with CACs and DMIs in pTHR.
Methods
Longitudinal studies reporting dislocation following the use of CACs or DMIs in pTHR were sought from MEDLINE and EMBASE to September 2020. Secondary outcomes included revision surgery for dislocation and all causes.
Results
46 studies (three CAC; 43 DMI) comprising 582 CACs and 18,748 DMIs were included. The pooled incidence of dislocation was 1.08% (95% CI:0.00,3.72) (range 0.27-2.60%) over a weighted mean follow-up of 4.1 years for CACs, compared with 0.25% (95% CI:0.08,0.46) (range 0.00-4.72%) over 6.2 years for DMIs. For DMIs, there was a temporal decline in dislocations from the 1980s onwards, and dislocation rates remained low (<1%) until 15 years post-operatively. There were insufficient data for similar analysis of CACs. All studies were at high risk of bias. The incidence of revision for dislocation after CACs was 0.3% versus 0.1% for DMIs, and the incidence of revision for all causes after CACs was 4.8% versus 2.7% for DMIs.
Conclusion
DMIs demonstrated a lower incidence of dislocation compared to CACs; however, there was a relative absence of CACs used in the context of pTHR in the literature. Temporal trends in dislocation have improved over time for DMIs.
Dislocation after a primary total hip replacement (pTHR) remains a common cause of treatment failure. Constrained acetabular components (CACs) and dual mobility implants (DMIs) may mitigate this in patients at high risk of dislocation or with significant intra-operative instability. This meta-analysis evaluated the incidence and temporal trends of dislocation following implantation with CACs and DMIs in pTHR.
Methods
Longitudinal studies reporting dislocation following the use of CACs or DMIs in pTHR were sought from MEDLINE and EMBASE to September 2020. Secondary outcomes included revision surgery for dislocation and all causes.
Results
46 studies (three CAC; 43 DMI) comprising 582 CACs and 18,748 DMIs were included. The pooled incidence of dislocation was 1.08% (95% CI:0.00,3.72) (range 0.27-2.60%) over a weighted mean follow-up of 4.1 years for CACs, compared with 0.25% (95% CI:0.08,0.46) (range 0.00-4.72%) over 6.2 years for DMIs. For DMIs, there was a temporal decline in dislocations from the 1980s onwards, and dislocation rates remained low (<1%) until 15 years post-operatively. There were insufficient data for similar analysis of CACs. All studies were at high risk of bias. The incidence of revision for dislocation after CACs was 0.3% versus 0.1% for DMIs, and the incidence of revision for all causes after CACs was 4.8% versus 2.7% for DMIs.
Conclusion
DMIs demonstrated a lower incidence of dislocation compared to CACs; however, there was a relative absence of CACs used in the context of pTHR in the literature. Temporal trends in dislocation have improved over time for DMIs.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 993-1001.e8 |
Journal | Journal of Arthroplasty |
Volume | 37 |
Issue number | 5 |
Early online date | 17 Jan 2022 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 17 Jan 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Competing Interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: support from NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol for the submitted work. A.W.B. and M.R.W. disclose financial activities, outside the remit of the submitted work (A.W.B.: research grants; M.R.W.: research grants, lecturing, textbook royalties); no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Funding Information:
Funding: This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Center at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol ( BRC-1215-20011 ). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in considering the study design or in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier Inc.
Keywords
- arthroplasty
- replacement
- hip
- hip dislocation
- contrained acetabular componant
- dual mobility implant
- systematic review
- meta-analysis