Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biomechanical concept and clinical outcome of dual mobility cups

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dual mobility cup systems in total hip arthroplasty consist of a metal back with a non-constrained liner, in which a constrained standard head articulates. While superior stability of such implants in comparison with standard total hip replacements is assumed, it is the purpose of this study to outline the biomechanical concept of dual mobility cups and to describe implant survival and dislocation rate based on the series published in the English-speaking and Francophone literature. A growing body of evidence indicates reduced dislocation rates in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty and in selected tumour cases. The limited availability of studies evaluating long-term implant survival and existing concerns with regard to increased wear rates and aseptic loosening, leads to the conclusion that such implants have to be used with prudence, particularly in standard primary hip arthroplasty and in young patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS (2004) The cumulative long-term risk of dislocation after primary Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:9–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Philippot R, Camilleri JP, Boyer B, Adam P, Farizon F (2009) The use of a dual-articulation acetabular cup system to prevent dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: analysis of 384 cases at a mean follow-up of 15 years. Int Orthop 33:927–932. doi:10.1007/s00264-008-0589-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Woo RY, Morrey BF (1982) Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:1295–1306

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pattyn C, De Haan R, Kloeck A, Van Maele G, De Smet K (2010) Complications encountered with the use of constrained acetabular prostheses in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 25:287–294. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2008.10.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fricka KB, Marshall A, Paprosky WG (2006) Constrained liners in revision total hip arthroplasty: an overuse syndrome: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 21:121–125. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.02.100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Williams JT Jr, Ragland PS, Clarke S (2007) Constrained components for the unstable hip following total hip arthroplasty: a literature review. Int Orthop 31:273–277. doi:10.1007/s00264-006-0191-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson MJ, Murray WR, Skinner HB (1994) Constrained acetabular components. J Arthroplasty 9:17–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schmalzried TP, Callaghan JJ (1999) Wear in total hip and knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:115–136

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Vielpeau C, Lebel B, Ardouin L, Burdin G, Lautridou C (2011) The dual mobility socket concept: experience with 668 cases. Int Orthop 35:225–230. doi:10.1007/s00264-010-1156-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stulberg SD (2011) Dual poly liner mobility optimizes wear and stability in THA: affirms. Orthopedics 34:e445–e448. doi:10.3928/01477447-20110714-23

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mohammed R, Cnudde P (2011) Severe metallosis owing to intraprosthetic dislocation in a failed dual-mobility cup primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2010.11.019

  12. Leiber-Wackenheim F, Brunschweiler B, Ehlinger M, Gabrion A, Mertl P (2011) Treatment of recurrent THR dislocation using of a cementless dual-mobility cup: a 59 cases series with a mean 8 years' follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 97:8–13. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2010.08.003

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Boyer B, Philippot R, Geringer J, Farizon F (2011) Primary total hip arthroplasty with dual mobility socket to prevent dislocation: a 22-year follow-up of 240 hips. Int Orthop 36(3):511–518. doi:10.1007/s00264-011-1289-4

    Google Scholar 

  14. Tarasevicius S, Busevicius M, Robertsson O, Wingstrand H (2010) Dual mobility cup reduces dislocation rate after arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11:175. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-11-175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pineau V, Lebel B, Gouzy S, Dutheil JJ, Vielpeau C (2010) Dual mobility hip arthroplasty wear measurement: experimental accuracy assessment using radiostereometric analysis (RSA). Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:609–615. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2010.04.007

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Philippeau JM, Durand JM, Carret JP, Leclercq S, Waast D, Gouin F (2010) Dual mobility design socket use in preventing total hip replacement dislocation following tumor resection. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:2–8. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2009.10.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Massin P, Besnier L (2010) Acetabular revision using a press-fit dual mobility cup. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:9–13. doi:10.1016/j.rcot.2009.11.006

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hamadouche M, Biau DJ, Huten D, Musset T, Gaucher F (2010) The use of a cemented dual mobility socket to treat recurrent dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:3248–3254. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1404-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Coventry MB (1985) Late dislocations in patients with Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:832–841

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Guyen O, Chen QS, Bejui-Hugues J, Berry DJ, An KN (2007) Unconstrained tripolar hip implants: effect on hip stability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 455:202–208. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000238796.59596.1f

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF (2002) Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 17:282–288

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Peter R, Lubbeke A, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P (2011) Cup size and risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2010.11.015

  23. Jameson SS, Lees D, James P, Serrano-Pedraza I, Partington PF, Muller SD, Meek RM, Reed MR (2011) Lower rates of dislocation with increased femoral head size after primary total hip replacement: a five-year analysis of NHS patients in England. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:876–880. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B7.26657

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS (2005) Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2456–2463. doi:10.2106/JBJS.D.02860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sariali E, Lazennec JY, Khiami F, Catonne Y (2009) Mathematical evaluation of jumping distance in total hip arthroplasty: influence of abduction angle, femoral head offset, and head diameter. Acta Orthop 80:277–282. doi:10.3109/17453670902988378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kerboull L, Hamadouche M, Courpied JP, Kerboull M (2004) Long-term results of Charnley-Kerboull hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 50 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res:112–118

  27. Dumbleton JH, Manley MT, Edidin AA (2002) A literature review of the association between wear rate and osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 17:649–661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Digas G, Karrholm J, Thanner J, Herberts P (2007) 5-Year experience of highly cross-linked polyethylene in cemented and uncemented sockets: two randomized studies using radiostereometric analysis. Acta Orthop 78:746–754. doi:10.1080/17453670710014518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Garcia-Rey E, Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Cruz-Pardos A, Ortega-Chamarro J (2008) New polyethylenes in total hip replacement: a prospective, comparative clinical study of two types of liner. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:149–153. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.90B2.19887

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Wroblewski BM (1985) Direction and rate of socket wear in Charnley low-friction arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 67:757–761

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Adam P, Farizon F, Fessy MH (2005) Dual articulation retentive acetabular liners and wear: surface analysis of 40 retrieved polyethylene implants. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 91:627–636

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Schmalzried TP, Dorey FJ, McKellop H (1998) The multifactorial nature of polyethylene wear in vivo. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:1234–1242, discussion 1242–1233

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Wroblewski BM (1986) 15–21-year results of the Charnley low-friction arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res:30–35

  34. Kim YS, Kim YH, Hwang KT, Choi IY (2012) The cartilage degeneration and joint motion of bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Int Orthop. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1567-9

  35. Lazennec J, Ali H, Rousseau M, Hansen S (2006) All ceramic tripolar total hip arthroplasty: experimental data and clinical results. In: Benazzo F, Falez F, Dietrich M (eds) Ceramics in orthopaedics. Steinkopff, Darmstadt, pp 5–9

  36. Farizon F, de Lavison R, Azoulai JJ, Bousquet G (1998) Results with a cementless alumina-coated cup with dual mobility. A twelve-year follow-up study. Int Orthop 22:219–224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Massin P, Orain V, Philippot R, Farizon F, Fessy MH (2011) Fixation failures of dual mobility cups: a mid-term study of 2601 hip replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(7):1932–1940. doi:10.1007/s11999-011-2213-3

    Google Scholar 

  38. Leclercq S, Benoit JY, de Rosa JP, Euvrard P, Leteurtre C, Girardin P (2008) Results of the evora dual-mobility socket after a minimum follow-up of five years. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94:e17–e22. doi:10.1016/j.rco.2007.10.015

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Adam P, Philippe R, Ehlinger M, Roche O, Bonnomet F, Mole D, Fessy MH (2012) Dual mobility cups hip arthroplasty as a treatment for displaced fracture of the femoral neck in the elderly. A prospective, systematic, multicenter study with specific focus on postoperative dislocation. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98:296–300. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2012.01.005

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Lautridou C, Lebel B, Burdin G, Vielpeau C (2008) Survival of the cementless bousquet dual mobility cup: minimum 15-year follow-up of 437 total hip arthroplasties. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94:731–739. doi:10.1016/j.rco.2008.06.001

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Philippot R, Adam P, Farizon F, Fessy MH, Bousquet G (2006) Survival of cementless dual mobility sockets: ten-year follow-up. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 92:326–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Herberts P (2010) Swedish joint registry. Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Sweden

  43. Guyen O, Pibarot V, Vaz G, Chevillotte C, Bejui-Hugues J (2009) Use of a dual mobility socket to manage total hip arthroplasty instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:465–472. doi:10.1007/s11999-008-0476-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Langlais FL, Ropars M, Gaucher F, Musset T, Chaix O (2008) Dual mobility cemented cups have low dislocation rates in THA revisions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:389–395. doi:10.1007/s11999-007-0047-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Philippot R, Adam P, Reckhaus M, Delangle F, Verdot FX, Curvale G, Farizon F (2009) Prevention of dislocation in total hip revision surgery using a dual mobility design. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:407–413. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2009.04.016

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Khatod M, Barber T, Paxton E, Namba R, Fithian D (2006) An analysis of the risk of hip dislocation with a contemporary total joint registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 447:19–23. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000218752.22613.78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Alberton GM, High WA, Morrey BF (2002) Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:1788–1792

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Corbett KL, Losina E, Nti AA, Prokopetz JJ, Katz JN (2010) Population-based rates of revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. PLoS One 5:e13520. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Zehr RJ, Enneking WF, Scarborough MT (1996) Allograft-prosthesis composite versus megaprosthesis in proximal femoral reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res:207–223

  50. Cottias P, Jeanrot C, Vinh TS, Tomeno B, Anract P (2001) Complications and functional evaluation of 17 saddle prostheses for resection of periacetabular tumors. J Surg Oncol 78:90–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Haentjens P, de Neve W, Casteleyn PP, Opdecam P (1993) Massive resection and prosthetic replacement for the treatment of metastases of the trochanteric and subtrochanteric femoral region bipolar arthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 59(Suppl 1):367–371

    Google Scholar 

  52. Masterson EL, Ferracini R, Griffin AM, Wunder JS, Bell RS (1998) Capsular replacement with synthetic mesh: effectiveness in preventing postoperative dislocation after wide resection of proximal femoral tumors and prosthetic reconstruction. J Arthroplasty 13:860–866

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Philippot R, Farizon F, Camilleri JP, Boyer B, Derhi G, Bonnan J, Fessy MH, Lecuire F (2008) Survival of cementless dual mobility socket with a mean 17 years follow-up. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 94:e23–e27. doi:10.1016/j.rco.2007.10.013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois CHUV, Av Pierre Decker 4, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Aron Grazioli & Hannes Andreas Rüdiger

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Eugene Teow Hin Ek

Authors
  1. Aron Grazioli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eugene Teow Hin Ek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hannes Andreas Rüdiger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannes Andreas Rüdiger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grazioli, A., Ek, E.T.H. & Rüdiger, H.A. Biomechanical concept and clinical outcome of dual mobility cups. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 36, 2411–2418 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1678-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1678-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation