ArticleArthroplasty today2019
Anatomic dual mobility compared to modular dual mobility in primary total hip arthroplasty: a matched cohort study.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modular versus monobloc dual mobility components for primary cementless total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of implants' survival, complication rates, clinical and radiographic outcomes.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Pooled it
- Modular dual mobility articulation in primary and revision hip arthroplasty: lights and shadows.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing dislocation rates by approach following elective primary dual mobility total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Pooled it
- Intraprosthetic Dislocation Following Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Comparison of Outcomes Between Modular Dual Mobility and Conventional Hip Implants in Primary, Elective Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025Article
- Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes and Survivorship of Three Modular Dual Mobility Implants in Primary Total Hip Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Investigation of contact behavior on a model of the dual-mobility artificial hip joint for Asians in different inner liner thicknesses.World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- Intraprosthetic Dislocation of a Modular Dual-Mobility Total Hip Arthroplasty With Posterior Migration of the Polyethylene Liner.Arthroplasty today · 2024Article
- Single center evaluation of outcomes of modular dual mobility liners during revision total hip arthroplasty: A five-year follow-up.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Is Modular Dual Mobility Superior to Standard Bearings for Reducing Dislocation Risk after Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Retrospective Comparative Multicenter Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Dual-mobility versus Fixed-bearing in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Outcome Comparison.Hip & pelvis · 2022Article
- Hip stability parameters with dual mobility, modular dual mobility and fixed bearing in total hip arthroplasty: an analytical evaluation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty using the modular dual mobility acetabular system to treat recurrent dislocation.International orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Use of a modular hip dual-mobility articulation in patients with high risk of dislocation: a relatively small-sized acetabulum in Asian patients may limit its use.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2021Article
- Adverse reaction to metal debris due to fretting corrosion between the acetabular components of modular dual-mobility constructs in total hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EFORT open reviews · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDual mobility (DM) has been used in primary total hip arthroplasty recently for their low dislocation rates, low revision rates, and improved patient functional outcomes. We compared 2 DM systems, anatomic dual mobility (ADM; Stryker, Mahwah, NJ) and modular dual mobility (MDM; Stryker, Mahwah, NJ), to determine differences in dislocation rates, revision rates, and patient outcome scores.
methodsThe study was a single-center matched retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty surgery with an ADM or MDM system by a single surgeon from 2012 to 2017. Demographics, operative details, postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship curve to compare survival time between groups was collected as well.
resultsFive hundred seventy-four patients were included in the study with 287 patients matched in each group with mean 2.86 years of follow-up. The dislocation rate in each cohort was 0%, the acetabular-specific revision rate was 0%, and in each cohort, overall revision rate in each cohort was 1.7%. In general, patient-reported outcomes were similar for each group (Harris Hip Score Pain (
conclusionsBoth DM systems had similar patient-reported outcomes that were quite favorable. At 2.86 years of follow-up, neither the ADM nor MDM systems demonstrated dislocation, and both had low acetabular-specific and overall revision rates in this matched cohort study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.