In short-term outcomes ( 5 years or less , with follow-up of 0–5 years ) , the best implant of choice that has lowest risk of revision and dislocation after THA is DMTHA follow by BTHA .
Abstract Postoperative dislocation is a challenging complication after  total hip arthroplasty ( THA ) that affects patient outcome worldwide .
Instability is one of the main complications with rates exceeding 20 % in some series .
Currently , alternative acetabular components are available with dual mobility ( DMTHA ) bearing surfaces and larger femoral head size that may reduce the risk of dislocation , yet provide the functional benefit of st and ard single mobility ( STHA ) bearing surface THA .
However , whether STHA , big femoral head ( BTHA ) and DMTHA should be used is still controversial .
This systematic review and meta- analysis aim to compare postoperative dislocation and revision ( aseptic loosening and infection ) of BTHA , STHA and DMTHA in primary or revision THA .
These clinical outcomes consist of postoperative dislocation and revision ( aseptic loosening and infection ) .
Comparison of dual-mobility cup and unipolar cup for prevention of dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty
Background and purpose — Revision total hip arthroplasty ( THA ) is associated with higher dislocation rates than primary THA . We compared the risk of dislocation within 6 months and all-cause re-revision during the whole study period using either the dual-mobility cup or the unipolar cup . Methods — We used a prospect i ve hospital registry-based cohort including all total and cup-only revision THAs performed between 2003 and 2013 . The cups used were either dual-mobility or unipolar ; the choice was made according to the preference of the surgeon . 316 revision THAs were included . The mean age of the cohort was 69 ( 25–98 ) years and 160 THAs ( 51 % ) were performed in women . The dual-mobility group ( group 1 ) included 150 THAs ( 48 % ) and the mean length of follow-up was 31 ( 0–128 ) months . The unipolar group ( group 2 ) included 166 THAs ( 53 % ) and the mean length of follow-up was 52 ( 0–136 ) months . Results — The incidence of dislocation within 6 months was significantly lower with the dual-mobility cup than with the unipolar cup ( 2.7 % vs. 7.8 % ) . The unadjusted risk ratio ( RR ) was 0.34 ( 95 % CI : 0.11–1.02 ) and the adjusted RR was 0.28 ( 95 % CI : 0.09–0.87 ) . The number of patients needed to treat with a  dual-mobility cup in order to prevent 1 case of dislocation was 19 . The unadjusted incidence rate ratio for all-cause re-revision in the dual-mobility group compared to the unipolar group was 0.6 ( 95 % CI : 0.3–1.4 ) . Interpretation — Use of a dual-mobility rather than a unipolar cup in revision THA reduced the risk of dislocation within 6 months
In short-term outcomes ( 5 years or less , with follow-up of 0–5 years ) , the best implant of choice that has lowest risk of revision and dislocation after THA is DMTHA follow by BTHA .
Abstract Postoperative dislocation is a challenging complication after  total hip arthroplasty ( THA ) that affects patient outcome worldwide .
Instability is one of the main complications with rates exceeding 20 % in some series .
Currently , alternative acetabular components are available with dual mobility ( DMTHA ) bearing surfaces and larger femoral head size that may reduce the risk of dislocation , yet provide the functional benefit of st and ard single mobility ( STHA ) bearing surface THA .
However , whether STHA , big femoral head ( BTHA ) and DMTHA should be used is still controversial .
This systematic review and meta- analysis aim to compare postoperative dislocation and revision ( aseptic loosening and infection ) of BTHA , STHA and DMTHA in primary or revision THA .
These clinical outcomes consist of postoperative dislocation and revision ( aseptic loosening and infection ) .