Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37559883›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2023

Single center evaluation of outcomes of modular dual mobility liners during revision total hip arthroplasty: A five-year follow-up.

Jeremy A Dubin, Sandeep S Bains, Zhongming Chen, Daniel Hameed, Mallory C Moore, Michael A Mont, James Nace, Ronald E Delanois

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Antithrombotic prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jeremy A DubinLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sandeep S BainsLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Zhongming ChenLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Daniel HameedLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Mallory C MooreLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Michael A MontLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
James NaceLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Ronald E DelanoisLifebridge Health, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is at increased risk for postoperative instability when compared to primary cases, which has been mitigated to some extent with the introduction of dual mobility (DM) reconstructions. These constructs were designed to lower dislocation rates and to improve impingement-free range of motion. As a follow-up to our prior institutional study, we expanded on a cohort of DM reconstructions compared to non-DM constructs. We examined a modular dual mobility system in rTHA to measure loosening of the acetabular component, as well as revision and dislocation rates in comparison to an historical cohort of single articulation prostheses.Materials/Methods: This retrospective cohort study from a single center included 254 patients who underwent rTHA with a dual mobility liner by three fellowship-trained surgeons between January 1, 2014 and December 1, 2019. This was a follow-up to an historical cohort of revisions performed with a single articulation prosthesis (n = 120) from the same surgeons performed between January 1, 2011 and December 23, 2013. The inclusion criteria included consecutively performed rTHAs that had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. We excluded patients who had femoral revisions and head/liner revisions only. The average follow-up in the dual mobility cohort and the single articulation cohort was 5 years (range, 2-10 years) and 2.5 years (range, 1.5-4.3 years), respectively. The primary outcomes were dislocation, aseptic loosening, and re-revision rates. Secondary outcomes were radiographic analyses of cup migration and osteolysis. Results: There were 4 out of 256 (1.6%) dislocations from the dual mobility cohort compared to 7 out of 120 (5.8%), Conclusion: The dual mobility articulations in rTHA demonstrated improved results in terms of lower dislocations rates when compared to a single articulation prostheses. Our center uses these articulations for revisions and surgeons should consider the use of these bearings when performing rTHA.

Indexed as

Dislocation ratesDual mobilityLinersRevision ratesrTHA

Identifiers

PMID37559883
PMCPMC10407033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.