ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2024
Dual Mobility in Extreme Situations of Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Case Series of 3 Cases and Review of Literature.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dual mobility (DM) total hip replacement (THR) features an acetabular component with an unconstrained tripolar build which ensures a greater range of motion without provoking any dislocation.We report three cases with extremes of surgical misadventure where we carried out a revision arthroplasty with a DM cup. The causes of the failure of the primary arthroplasty were multifactorial, even individually, and ranged from instability due to component malposition, trochanteric fracture, intrapelvic prosthesis protrusion, etc. Case Report: (1) Case 1 is a 40-year-old male, who following a failed fixation of a right proximal femur shaft fracture had undergone a proximal femur replacement outside with a proximal femur bipolar prosthesis and presented with a dislocated prosthesis due to excessive anteversion of 40 of the stem. Revision was done by inserting a DM cup without revising the stem to preserve the valuable femoral bone stock. (2) Case 2 is an 84-year-old comorbid female, who had come with right protrusio acetabuli with bipolar prosthesis in situ. The patient was managed with bone grafting and insertion of a DM cup with a peripheral fit. Greater trochanter wiring was done for the greater trochanter fracture (GTF) along with prophylactic posterior column plating. (3) Case 3 is a 60-year-old male, who had left sided chronic THR instability. He has had three previous episodes of dislocation which started after 7 years, when the patient fell and had a GTF. Here, the causes of instability were multifactorial- GTF, malposition, and liner wear. Instead of using a constrained liner and predisposing the patient to impingement, we did an isolated revision with a DM cup only. Conclusion: The presented cases highlight the versatility and efficacy of utilizing a DM cup in revision arthroplasty for addressing diverse causes of primary hip arthroplasty failure. The adaptability is demonstrated in preserving the bone stock, managing bone loss, and addressing multifactorial instability, thereby emphasizing its widespread potential.
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.