Cargando…

Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis

Introduction: Revision THA (R-THA) is thought to have a higher complication rate if compared to primary THA. Dual Mobility (DM) implants have been designed aiming for achieving greater stability, with good clinical results. However, scarce material can be found about the real improvements provided b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giacomo, Placella, Giulia, Bettinelli, Valerio, Pace, Vincenzo, Salini, Pierluigi, Antinolfi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: EDP Sciences 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7984151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33749588
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021015
_version_ 1783668015694348288
author Giacomo, Placella
Giulia, Bettinelli
Valerio, Pace
Vincenzo, Salini
Pierluigi, Antinolfi
author_facet Giacomo, Placella
Giulia, Bettinelli
Valerio, Pace
Vincenzo, Salini
Pierluigi, Antinolfi
author_sort Giacomo, Placella
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Revision THA (R-THA) is thought to have a higher complication rate if compared to primary THA. Dual Mobility (DM) implants have been designed aiming for achieving greater stability, with good clinical results. However, scarce material can be found about the real improvements provided by this type of implant compared to traditional implant in Revisions of Total Hip Arthroplasties. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies were performed in December 2019. This was in accordance with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Our primary outcome measure was overall survivorship and dislocation rate, either treated with a conservative method or requiring surgery. Results: Regarding the overall implant survival, we found a slight significant risk ratio, with a statistically meaningful difference between the two groups in questions in favour of the DM implant. A statistically significant difference in favour of the DM group turned out considering only the Dislocation rate Risk ratio and the aseptic loosening risk as well. No statistical difference was found between the two groups about the risk ratio of infection. Discussion: A steady increase of evidence is demonstrating the efficacy of using a DM cup system in THA revisions with low dislocation rates, but currently there is no study in the literature that demonstrates with statistically significant evidence. The main finding of the present study is that implant’s Survivor and prevention of dislocation at medium follow-up showed better results with a DM if compared to a fixed-bearing cup, for Revision THA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7984151
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79841512021-03-25 Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis Giacomo, Placella Giulia, Bettinelli Valerio, Pace Vincenzo, Salini Pierluigi, Antinolfi SICOT J Review Article Introduction: Revision THA (R-THA) is thought to have a higher complication rate if compared to primary THA. Dual Mobility (DM) implants have been designed aiming for achieving greater stability, with good clinical results. However, scarce material can be found about the real improvements provided by this type of implant compared to traditional implant in Revisions of Total Hip Arthroplasties. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies were performed in December 2019. This was in accordance with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Our primary outcome measure was overall survivorship and dislocation rate, either treated with a conservative method or requiring surgery. Results: Regarding the overall implant survival, we found a slight significant risk ratio, with a statistically meaningful difference between the two groups in questions in favour of the DM implant. A statistically significant difference in favour of the DM group turned out considering only the Dislocation rate Risk ratio and the aseptic loosening risk as well. No statistical difference was found between the two groups about the risk ratio of infection. Discussion: A steady increase of evidence is demonstrating the efficacy of using a DM cup system in THA revisions with low dislocation rates, but currently there is no study in the literature that demonstrates with statistically significant evidence. The main finding of the present study is that implant’s Survivor and prevention of dislocation at medium follow-up showed better results with a DM if compared to a fixed-bearing cup, for Revision THA. EDP Sciences 2021-03-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7984151/ /pubmed/33749588 http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021015 Text en © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2021 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Giacomo, Placella
Giulia, Bettinelli
Valerio, Pace
Vincenzo, Salini
Pierluigi, Antinolfi
Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title_full Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title_fullStr Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title_full_unstemmed Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title_short Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis
title_sort dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: a systematic review and metanalysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7984151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33749588
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2021015
work_keys_str_mv AT giacomoplacella dualmobilityfortotalhiparthroplastyrevisionsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetanalysis
AT giuliabettinelli dualmobilityfortotalhiparthroplastyrevisionsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetanalysis
AT valeriopace dualmobilityfortotalhiparthroplastyrevisionsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetanalysis
AT vincenzosalini dualmobilityfortotalhiparthroplastyrevisionsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetanalysis
AT pierluigiantinolfi dualmobilityfortotalhiparthroplastyrevisionsurgeryasystematicreviewandmetanalysis