Hip stability parameters with dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearing in total hip arthroplasty: an analytical evaluation

Domenico Tigani; Lorenzo Banci; Riccardo Valtorta; Luca Amendola

doi:10.1186/s12891-022-05280-2

Hip stability parameters with dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearing in total hip arthroplasty: an analytical evaluation

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Apr 20;23(1):373. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05280-2.

Authors

Domenico Tigani¹, Lorenzo Banci², Riccardo Valtorta³, Luca Amendola¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopaedics, Maggiore Hospital, Largo Nigrisoli 2, 40100, Bologna, Italy.
² Department of Clinical Research and D&R, Permedica S.P.A, Via Como 38, 23807, Merate, Italy. lorenzo.banci@permedica.it.
³ Department of Clinical Research and D&R, Permedica S.P.A, Via Como 38, 23807, Merate, Italy.

Abstract

Background: Use of dual mobility (DM) in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity due to the ability to reduce dislocation through increased jumping distance and impingement-free arc of movement. Recently, modular dual mobility (modDM) systems were introduced to give the possibility to use DM with standard metal-backed shells, however few has been studied to date regarding how jumping distance and the center of rotation change with modDM. The objective of this study was to evaluate, through analytical simulation, how jumping distance, center of rotation and arc of movement change between DM and standard cups with modDM or fixed bearings (FB).

Methods: 3D-models of DM and standard press-fit cups with modDM or FB liners were used to simulate DM, modDM and FB implant configurations, matched for same cup size, according to same cup position and different femoral head diameters. Jumping distance was calculated and center of rotation lateralization and oscillation angles were measured for each size of these three implant configurations.

Results: Jumping distance with modDM was reduced by -3.9 mm to -8.6 mm in comparison with DM, from 48 to 64 mm size, but resulted comparable to polyethylene 36 mm FB and increased by + 1.1 mm and + 1.4 mm than ceramic 36 and 40 mm FBs for sizes > 54 mm. ModDM lateralized the center of rotation up to + 2.5 mm and + 4.0 mm in comparison with DM and FBs, respectively. Oscillation angle with modDM resulted higher than + 16°, + 23°, + 17° and + 14° in comparison to DM, 28 mm, 32 mm and 36 mm FB cups, respectively, for 56 mm cup size.

Conclusions: According to its specific design, modDM might change hip stability parameters in comparison to DM, worsening jumping distance and center of rotation position, but increasing arc of movement. As not restoring stability parameters in the same fashion, modDM implants should be properly used when DM cups are not feasible.

Keywords: Dislocation; Dual mobility; Jumping distance; Modular dual mobility; Oscillation angle; Total hip arthroplasty.

MeSH terms

Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip*
Hip Dislocation* / surgery
Hip Prosthesis*
Humans
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Reoperation