Étude d’une série de 438 cupules non cimentées à double mobilité

Philippot, Rémi; Farizon, Frédéric; Camilleri, J.-P.; Boyer, Bertrand; Derhi, Guy; Bonnan, Jean-Claude; Fessy, Michel‐Henri; Lecuire, F

doi:10.1016/j.rco.2007.10.011

Cited by 38 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…After reviewing the abstracts of these, 75 were screened for eligibility and 16 were identified for inclusion. Fifty-nine articles were excluded because reporting no IPD episodes (30 articles) [7] , [15] , [16] , [17] , [18] , [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] , [36] , [37] , [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , IPD episodes were not mentioned (13) [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] , [49] , [50] , [51] , [52] , [53] , [54] , [55] , [56] , reporting delayed IPD episodes (13) [8] , [57] , [58] , [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] , [64] , [65] , [66] , [67] , [68] , reporting early IPD episodes with old DM designs with small femoral heads (2) [9] , [69] , and reporting a suspicious IPD episode (1) [70] ( Fig. 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early intraprosthetic dislocation in dual-mobility implants: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDual mobility implants are subject to a specific implant-related complication, intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD), in which the polyethylene liner dissociates from the femoral head. For older generation designs, IPD was attributable to late polyethylene wear and subsequent failure of the head capture mechanism. However, early IPDs have been reportedly affecting contemporary designs.MethodsA systematic review of the literature according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines was performed. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar was conducted for English articles between January 1974 and August 2016 using various combinations of the keywords “intraprosthetic dislocation,” “dual mobility,” “dual-mobility,” “tripolar,” “double mobility,” “double-mobility,” “hip,” “cup,” “socket,” and “dislocation.”ResultsIn all, 16 articles met our inclusion criteria. Fourteen were case reports and 2 were retrospective case series. These included a total of 19 total hip arthroplasties, which were divided into 2 groups: studies dealing with early IPD after attempted closed reduction and those dealing with early IPD with no history of previous attempted closed reduction. Early IPD was reported in 15 patients after a mean follow-up of 3.2 months (2.9 SD) in the first group and in 4 patients after a mean follow-up of 15.1 months (9.9 SD) in the second group.ConclusionsBased on the current data, most cases have been preceded by an attempted closed reduction in the setting of outer, large articulation dislocation, perhaps indicating an iatrogenic etiology for early IPD. Recognition of this possible failure mode is essential to its prevention and treatment.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early intraprosthetic dislocation in dual-mobility implants: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First results show promising results for tripolar and dual mobility articulations regarding rate of luxation. The increased number of articulating interfaces may lead to an increased amount of particle debris and consecutive osteolysis, which raises concerns [42][43][44][45][46].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification

Jaenisch

Kohlhof

Kasapovic

et al. 2021

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The complex field of femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty displays a lack of standardized, intuitive pre- and intraoperative assessment. To address this issue, the femoral defect classification (FDC) is introduced to offer a reliable, reproducible and an intuitive classification system with a clear therapeutic guideline. Materials and methods The FDC is based on the integrity of the main femoral segments which determine function and structural support. It focuses on the femoral neck, the metaphysis consisting of the greater and lesser trochanter, and the femoral diaphysis. The four main categories determine the location of the defect while subcategories a, b and c are being used to classify the extent of damage in each location. In total, 218 preoperative radiographs were retrospectively graded according to FDC and compared to intraoperatively encountered bone defects. To account for inter-rater and intra-rater agreement, 5 different observers evaluated 80 randomized cases at different points in time. Results A Cohens kappa of 0.832 ± 0.028 could be evaluated, accounting for excellent agreement between preoperative radiographs and intraoperative findings. To account for inter-rater reliability, 80 patients have been evaluated by 5 different observers. Testing for inter-rater reliability, a Fleiss Kappa of 0.688 could be evaluated falling into the good agreement range. When testing for intra-rater reliability, Cohens Kappa of each of the 5 raters has been analyzed and the mean was evaluated at 0.856 accounting for excellent agreement. Conclusion The FDC is a reliable and reproducible classification system. It combines intuitive use and structured design and allows for consistent preoperative planning and intraoperative guidance. A therapeutic algorithm has been created according to current literature and expert opinion. Due to the combination of the FDC with the recently introduced Acetabular Defect Classification (ADC) a structured approach to the entire field of hip revision arthroplasty is now available.

show abstract

“…With the increasing use of DMCs, even in primary surgery and younger populations [ 3 , 25 , 26 ], concerns have arisen regarding future complications. Several authors have described potential issues related to DMC, with the most specific being IPD [ 4 , 6 , [13] , [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] ]. Several implant-related factors have been identified as possible causes of IPD, such as large-diameter bearings, use of bone cement, large-diameter femoral necks, small head-to-neck ratios, and long necks that include skirting [ 2 , 3 , 5 , 15 , 24 , 25 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of DMCs has surged upward in recent years [ 11 , 12 ]; therefore, an increase in the number of incident failures can be expected, including some new modes of failure. To date, the described causes of DMC failure can be classified into 3 groups: femoral loosening, cup loosening, and intraprosthetic dislocation (IPD) [ 4 , 6 , [13] , [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] ]. IPD is a specific complication of DMC and occurs when the femoral head separates from the retentive polyethylene bearing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Late Breakage of a Dual-Mobility Polyethylene Insert in a Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Unusual Failure Mode

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of dual-mobility cups has gained popularity in recent years. Thus, surgeons can expect an increase in known and new causes of failure. We report a previously undescribed form of a late intraprosthetic dislocation consisting of a complete breakage of a polyethylene mobile bearing that suffered a dislocation 3 months after its implantation. Two years later, he began feeling anterior groin pain and suffered gait changes. Computed tomography scan revealed an eccentric alignment of the mobile polyethylene bearing suggestive of poly wear. During the revision surgery, the polyethylene was found to be split in 2. Possible causes of this complication are proposed. Our case shows a previously unreported implant-specific complication, so surgeons can identify it.

show abstract

Étude d’une série de 438 cupules non cimentées à double mobilité

Cited by 38 publications

References 5 publications

Early intraprosthetic dislocation in dual-mobility implants: a systematic review

Early intraprosthetic dislocation in dual-mobility implants: a systematic review

Femoral defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification

Late Breakage of a Dual-Mobility Polyethylene Insert in a Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Unusual Failure Mode

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About