Modular dual-mobility cups using ceramic liners: an original solution for selected indications?

Abstract

Background:

Dual mobility (DM) has been shown to improve stability both in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and is increasingly used in patients at high risk of dislocation and in the treatment of THA instability. The introduction of modular liners has helped to overcome some of the limitations of monoblock DM cups. In this context, the use of a ceramic liner would avoid the conventional cobalt-chromium liner in the titanium shell, which can be problematic in some situations. The aim of this paper is to report the outcomes of a consecutive series of patients undergoing revision THA using a modular DM cup with a ceramic liner instead of the conventional metal one, and to clarify the rationale for this currently “off-label” use.

Patients and methods:

This is a retrospective series of patients who received this new DM bearing in a single institution. Patients were followed up clinically and radiologically at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and yearly thereafter.

Results:

5 patients received the ceramic liner in the study period (2014–2019). The indications were instability or high risk of dislocation in ceramic liner fracture and ARMD with soft tissue damage after MoM THA. The mean age at surgery was 74 (63–82) years, the mean follow-up was 36 (12–72) months. No dislocation occurred, and no adverse events related to the implant were recorded.

Conclusions:

The use of a ceramic liner in a modular DM cup offers several advantages in selected patients, and the results of our cohort are encouraging. However, caution is needed in introducing this new bearing because knowledge is currently limited. Further studies on a larger number of patients and with longer follow-ups are needed to confirm these findings and before widespread use of the device.

Keywords

Ceramic liner cup revision dislocation dual mobility instability modular cup total hip arthroplasty

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Patel

Potts

Froimson

. The dislocating hip arthroplasty: prevention and treatment. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22: 86–90.

Gwam

Mistry

Mohamed

, et al. Current epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States: National Inpatient Sample 2009 to 2013. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 2088–2092.

Berry

. Unstable total hip arthroplasty: detailed overview. Instr Course Lect 2001; 50: 265–274.

Ullmark

. The unstable total hip arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 2016; 1: 83–88.

Parvizi

Picinic

Sharkey

. Revision total hip arthroplasty for instability: surgical techniques and principles. Instr Course Lect 2009; 58: 183–191.

Guyen

. Constrained liners, dual mobility or large diameter heads to avoid dislocation in THA. EFORT Open Rev 2016; 1: 197–204.

Jones

. Constrained acetabular liners. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33: 1331–1336.

Wera

Ting

Moric

, et al. Classification and management of the unstable total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27: 710–715.

Zagra

Caboni

. Total hip arthroplasty instability treatment without dual mobility cups: brief overview and experience of other options. Int Orthop 2017; 41: 661–668.

10.

Hailer

Weiss

Stark

, et al. Dual-mobility cups for revision due to instability are associated with a low rate of re-revisions due to dislocation: 228 patients from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2012; 83: 566–571.

11.

De Martino

D’Apolito

Soranoglou

, et al. Dislocation following total hip arthroplasty using dual mobility acetabular components: a systematic review. Bone Joint J 2017; 99–B: 18–24.

12.

Caton

Prudhon

Ferreira

, et al. A comparative and retrospective study of three hundred and twenty primary Charnley type hip replacements with a minimum follow up of ten years to assess whether a dual mobility cup has a decreased dislocation risk. Int Orthop 2014; 38: 1125–1129.

13.

Civinini

Carulli

Matassi

, et al. A dual-mobility cup reduces risk of dislocation in isolated acetabular revisions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470: 3542–3548.

14.

Matsen Ko

Pollag

Yoo

, et al. Serum metal ion levels following total hip arthroplasty with modular dual mobility components. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31: 186–189.

15.

Nam

Salih

Brown

, et al. Metal ion levels in young, active patients receiving a modular, dual mobility total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 1581–1585.

16.

Dalla Pria

Zagra

Esopi

, et al. Breakage and noises in ceramic on ceramic couplings. Eur Orthop Traumatol 2010; 1: 53–59.

17.

Zagra

Bianchi

Giacometti Ceroni

. Revision of ceramic fracture with ceramic-on-polyethylene in total hip arthroplasty: medium-term results. Injury 2016; 47(Suppl. 4): S116–S120.

18.

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry annual report 2019, https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/documents/10180/668596/Hip%2C+Knee+%26+Shoulder+Arthroplasty/c287d2a3-22df-a3bb-37a2-91e6c00bfcf0 (2019, accessed 1 February 2020).

19.

Lehil

Bozic

. Trends in total hip arthroplasty implant utilization in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29: 1915–1918.

20.

Hozack

. The dual mobility cup: what problems does it solve? Bone Joint J 2016; 98–B: 60–63.

21.

Cross

Nam

Mayman

. Ideal femoral head size in total hip arthroplasty balances stability and volumetric wear. HSS J 2012; 8: 270–274.

22.

Lachiewicz

Heckman

Soileau

, et al. Femoral head size and wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene at 5 to 8 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 3290–3296.

23.

Zagra

Gallazzi

. Bearing surfaces in primary total hip arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 2018; 3: 217–224.

24.

Cooper

Della Valle

Berger

, et al. Corrosion at the head-neck taper as a cause for adverse local tissue reactions after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94: 1655–1661.

25.

Norman

Denen

Land

, et al. Taper-trunnion interface stress varies significantly with head size and activity. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34: 157–162.

26.

Osman

Panagiotidou

Khan

, et al. Corrosion at the head-neck interface of current designs of modular femoral components: essential questions and answers relating to corrosion in modular head-neck junctions. Bone Joint J 2016; 98–B: 579–584.

27.

Tsikandylakis

Mohaddes

Cnudde

, et al. Head size in primary total hip arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 2018; 3: 225–231.

28.

Epinette

J-A

Lafuma

Robert

, et al. Cost-effectiveness model comparing dual-mobility to fixed-bearing designs for total hip replacement in France. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2016; 102: 143–148.

29.

Abdel

Miller

Hanssen

, et al. Cost analysis of dual-mobility versus large femoral head constructs in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34: 260–264.

30.

Barlow

McLawhorn

Westrich

. The Cost-effectiveness of dual mobility implants for primary total hip arthroplasty: a computer-based cost-utility model. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99: 768–777.

31.

Rudy

Padilla

Gabor

, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dual mobility and a value-based algorithm of utilization. Orthop Clin North Am 2019; 50: 151–158.

32.

Hothi

Ilo

Whittaker

, et al. Corrosion of metal modular cup liners. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30: 1652–1656.

33.

Agne

Underwood

Kocagoz

, et al. Is there material loss at the backside taper in modular CoCr acetabular liners? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473: 275–285.

34.

Tarity

Koch

Burket

, et al. Fretting and corrosion at the backside of modular cobalt chromium acetabular inserts: a retrieval analysis. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: 1033–1039.

35.

Sutter

McClellan

Attarian

, et al. Outcomes of modular dual mobility acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32: S220–S224.

36.

Hannouche

Hamadouche

Nizard

, et al. Ceramics in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 430: 62–71.

37.

Solarino

Zagra

Piazzolla

, et al. Results of 200 consecutive ceramic-on-ceramic cementless hip arthroplasties in patients up to 50 years of age: a 5-24 years of follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 2019; 34: S232–S237.

38.

Olmedo-Garcia

Zagra

. High risk of complications using metal heads after ceramic fracture in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 2019; 29: 373–378.

39.

Günther

K-P

Schmitt

Campbell

, et al. Consensus statement “Current evidence on the management of metal-on-metal bearings”–April 16, 2012. Hip Int 2013; 23: 2–5.

40.

Rahman

Amenábar

Hetaimish

, et al. Outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty in management of failed metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31: 2559–2563.

41.

Loving

Herrera

Banerjee

, et al. Dual mobility bearings withstand loading from steeper cup-inclinations without substantial wear. J Orthop Res 2015; 33(3): 398–404.