Dual-Mobility Articulations in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Mid-Term Outcomes From the American Joint Replacement Registry

• Published in: The Journal of arthroplasty 2024-11
• Main Authors: Heckmann, Nathanael D., Palmer, Ryan C., Otero, Jesse E., Jaffri, Heena, Mullen, Kyle J., Springer, Bryan D., Lieberman, Jay R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: American Joint Replacement Registry; dual-mobility; femoral head size; instability; revision
• ISSN: 0883-5403; 1532-8406; 1532-8406
• DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.135

In recent years, there has been an increased utilization of dual-mobility (DM) implants in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) to mitigate the risk of postoperative hip instability. This study aimed to present mid-term outcomes of DM bearings in primary THA using data from the American Joint Replacement Registry. Screening was conducted on patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent primary THA between 2012 and 2018. Patients were categorized into three groups: (1) DM articulation, (2) ≤ 32-mm femoral head, and (3) ≥ 36-mm femoral head. Multivariable statistical modeling was employed to analyze patient and hospital characteristics, minimizing potential confounding variables and identifying independent associations with revision. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to assess all-cause revision and revision specifically for instability. A total of 207,526 primary THAs were identified. Among them, 13,896 (6.7%) utilized DM articulation, 60,358 (29.1%) had a femoral head size of ≤ 32 mm, and 133,272 (64.2%) had a femoral head size of ≥ 36 mm. At the 8-year follow-up, the all-cause revision rate was higher in the DM group (3.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.1 to 4.1) compared to the ≤ 32-mm (2.6%, 95% CI 2.5 to 2.8) and ≥ 36-mm (2.7%, 95% CI 2.5 to 2.9) groups. However, the revision rate for instability was comparable among the DM (0.4%, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5), ≤ 32 mm (0.5%, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.5), and ≥ 36 mm (0.3%, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.4) groups at 8-year follow-up. The utilization of DM was associated with higher overall revision rates. However, no significant differences in rates of revision for instability were observed among any of the bearing surface groups. These findings may be attributed to surgeons selectively utilizing DM articulations in higher-risk patients.