ArticleOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
Cemented implantation of a dual mobility cup in an existing acetabular cup to prevent recurrent dislocation after total hip replacement.
Article in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent hip dislocation is a common complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The dual mobility cup (DMC) technique was introduced to reduce the risk of dislocation. Cementing DMC in a fixed acetabular cup may be a good alternative to the usual approach of implanting it directly into bone. We aimed to evaluate the outcome of DMC in preventing recurrent THA dislocation. In addition, we examined differences in clinical outcomes between the two techniques: cementation into a pre-existing acetabular cup versus direct implantation into bone.
methodsThe sample comprised 20 patients who underwent surgery using the DMC technique between 2014 and 2023. The primary endpoint was time to the occurrence of postoperative revision operation for any reason, assessed by the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.
resultsThis retrospective comparative study included a total of 20 patients: 10 with a cemented DMC in a fixed acetabular cup and 10 with cementation directly in bone. Each patient experienced at least one hip dislocation following THA. The mean age of the patients was 77.65 years. The mean follow-up duration was 9.91 ± 17.01 months. The average number of preoperative dislocations was 2.90 ± 1.97. A comparison between the outcomes of the two techniques showed no significant differences.
conclusionCemented DMC has shown favorable results in recent years, particularly in reducing the dislocation rate following revision THA in older patients. This makes it a valuable option to prevent more extensive surgery. Cementation in a fixed acetabular cup showed similar outcomes to the conventional approach, with no noticeable drawbacks.
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.