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 ) .
Does the Dual-Mobility Hip Prosthesis Produce Better Joint Kinematics During Extreme Hip Flexion Task?
BACKGROUND  Total hip arthroplasty ( THA )  using dual-mobility ( DM ) design permits larger hip range of motion . However , it is unclear how it benefits the patients during activities of daily living . The purpose was to compare kinematic variables of the operated limb between  THA patients using either DM or single-bearing ( SB ) implants during a squat task . METHODS Twenty-four THA patients were r and omly assigned to either a DM or SB implant and matched to 12 healthy controls ( CTRLs ) . They underwent 3-dimensional squat motion analysis  before and 9 months after surgery . Sagittal and frontal plane angles of the pelvis and the hip were analyzed using statistical parametric mapping . Paired analyses compared presurgery and postsurgery squat depth . RESULTS Peak sagittal pelvis angle of DM was closer to normal compared with that of SB . Both implant groups had similar hip angle patterns and magnitude but significantly lower than the CTRLs . SB reached a much large hip abduction compared with the other groups . Both surgical groups had significantly worst squat depth than the CTRLs . CONCLUSION Neither THA implant groups were able to return pelvis and hip kinematics to the level of CTRLs . The deficit of DM implants at the pelvis combined with the poorer functional scores should caution clinicians to use this implant design in active patients . SB design causes a larger hip abduction to reach their maximum squat depth . Post-THA rehabilitation should focus on improving joint range of motion and strength
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 ) .