Dislocation of large-diameter head (LDH) metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a rare complication. This study aimed to determine the incidence and risk factors for dislocation of LDH MoM THAs and HRAs.
Methods:
This retrospective analysis considered 4038 cementless LDH MoM THAs and HRAs, 3207 THAs in 2912 patients and 831 HRAs in 757 patients. The end of follow-up was revision due to dislocation. Incidence of dislocation was evaluated from this study population of 4038, and study groups were formed. The study was designed as a case-control study, and a threefold stratified randomised control group was formed. Demographic data were collected and radiological analyses were performed in the study groups.
Results:
There were 26/3207 (0.8%) early dislocations in the THA group, and 6/831 (0.7%) in the HRA group (p = 0.9). Most LDH THA dislocations occurred in a group with head size ⩽ 38 mm (18/26) (p < 0.001). In dislocated hips, there were more dysplastic acetabula and post-traumatic hips than in the control group (p = 0.036). In the dislocation group, the mean acetabulum component anteversion angle was 19.6° (standard deviation [SD] 13.4°) and in the control group it was 23.2° (SD 10.4°) (p = 0.006); 7/32 (21.8%) of dislocated THAs needed revision surgery, and mean time to revision from the index surgery was 1.2 (SD 2.6) years.
Discussion:
Dislocations occurred more often in THAs of head size ⩽ 38 mm and with a smaller anteversion angle of the acetabulum component. Hip dysplasia and post-traumatic osteoarthritis were more common in patients with dislocation.
JamesonSSLeesDJamesPet al. Lower rate of dislocation with increased femoral head size after primary hip replacement: a five-year analysis of NHS patients in England. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 876–880.
2.
MalviyaARamaskandhanJHollandJPet al. Metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2010; 92: 1675–1683.
3.
GirardJKernGMigaudHet al. Primary total hip arthroplasty revision due to dislocation: prospective French multicenter study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2013; 99:549–553.
4.
BozicKJKurtzSMLauEet al. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am2009; 91: 128–133.
5.
DobzyniakMFehringTKOdumS.Early failure in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2006; 447: 76–78.
6.
DorrLDWolfAWChandlerRet al. Classification and treatment of dislocations of total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res1983; 173: 151–158.
7.
HedlundhUSanzenLFredinH.The prognosis and treatment of dislocated total hip arthroplasties with a 22 mm head. J Bone Joint Surg Br1997; 79: 374–378.
8.
TurnerRS.Postoperative total hip prosthetic femoral head dislocations. Incidence, etiologic factors, and management. Clin Orthop Relat Res1994; 301: 196–204.
9.
TaoRLiuFLiuYKet al. A prospective comparative study of hip resurfacing arthroplasty and large-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty in younger patients-a minimum of five year follow-up. Int Orthop Epub ahead of print 18 February 2018. DOI: 10.1007/s00264–018–3819–9.
10.
WernerBCBrownTE.Instability after total hip arthroplasty. World J Orthop2012; 3: 122–130.
11.
LecerfGFessyMHPhilippotRet al. Femoral offset: anatomical concept, definition, assessment, implications for preoperative templating and hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2009; 95: 210–219.
12.
BrownTDElkinsJMPedersenDRet al. Impingement and dislocation in total hip arthroplasty: mechanisms and consequences. Iowa Orthop J2014; 34: 1–15.
LaborieLBLehmannTGEngesæterIØet al. Prevalence of radiographic findings thought to be associated with femoroacetabular impingement in a population-based cohort of 2081 healthy young adults. Radiology2011; 260: 494–502.
15.
SchoferMDPresselTHeyseTet al. Radiological determination of the anatomic hip center from pelvic landmarks. Acta Orthop Belg2010; 76: 479–485.
16.
KjellbergMAl-AmiryBEnglundEet al. Measurement of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. The reliability of a plain radiographic method compared to CT-scanogram. Skeletal Radiol2012; 41: 187–191.
17.
WoolsonSTHartfordJMSawyerA.Results of a method of leg-length equalization for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement. J Arthroplasty1999; 14: 159–164.
18.
CroweJFManiVJRanawatCS.Total hip replacement in congenital dislocation and dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am1979; 61: 15–23.
19.
WibergG.Studies on dysplastic acetabula and congenital subluxation of the hip joint with special reference to the complication of osteoarthritis. Acta Chir Scand1939; 83: 7–135.
20.
CoopermanD.What is the evidence to support acetabular dysplasia as a cause of osteoarthritis?J Pediatr Orthop2013; 33(Suppl 1); S2–S7.
21.
CoopermanDRWallenstenRStulbergSD.Acetabular dysplasia in the adult. Clin Orthop Relat Res1983; 175: 79–85.
22.
MastNHImpellizzeriFKellerSet al. Reliability and agreement of measures used in radiographic evaluation of the adult hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res2011; 469: 188–199.
23.
DorrLDBechtolCOWatkinsRGet al. Radiographic anatomic structure of the arthritic acetabulum and its influence on total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2000; 15: 890–900.
24.
AsayamaINaitoMFujisawaMet al. Relationship between radiographic measurements of reconstructed hip joint position and the Trendelenburg sign. J Arthroplasty2002; 17: 747–751.
25.
ClarkCRHuddlestonHDSchochEP3rdet al. Leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg2006; 14: 38–45.
26.
VareVBJr.The anatomy of the pelvic tear figure. J Bone Joint Surg Am1952; 34: 167–169.
27.
MeermansGMalikAWittJet al. Preoperative radiographic assessment of limb-length discrepancy in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2010; 469: 1677–1682.
28.
FessyMHN’diayeACarretJPet al. Locating the center of rotation of the hip. Surg Radiol Anat1999; 21: 247–250.
29.
WidmerKH.A simplified method to determine acetabular cup anteversion from plain radiographs. J Arthroplasty2004; 19: 387–390.
30.
MurrayDW.The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg Br1993; 75: 228–232.
31.
LewinnekGELewisJLTarrRet al. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am1978; 60: 217–220.
32.
SarmientoAEbramzadehEGoganWJet al. Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br1990; 72: 996–1002.
33.
DeLeeJGCharnleyJ.Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res1976; 121: 20–32.
34.
ParviziJPicinicEandSharkeyPF.Revision total hip arthroplasty for instability: surgical techniques and principles. J Bone Joint Surg Am2008; 90: 1134–1142.
35.
KostensaloIJunnilaMVirolainenPet al. Effect of femoral head size on risk of revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: a population-based analysis of 42,379 primary procedures from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop2013; 84: 342–347.
36.
SoongMRubashHEMacaulayW.Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg2004; 12: 314–321.
37.
GirardJLavigneMVendittoliPAet al. Biomechanical reconstruction of the hip joint: a randomized study comparing total hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br2006; 6: 721–726.
38.
Sanchez-SoteloJBerryDJ.Epidemiology of instability after total hip replacement. Orthop Clin North Am2001; 32: 543–552, vii.
39.
HailerNPWeissRJStarkAet al. The risk of revision due to dislocation after total hip arthroplasty depends on surgical approach, femoral head size, sex, and primary diagnosis. An analysis of 78,098 operations in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop2012; 83: 442–448.
40.
JørgensenCCKjaersgaard-AndersenPSolgaardSet al. Hip dislocations after 2,734 elective unilateral fast-track total hip arthroplasties: incidence, circumstances and predisposing factors. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2014; 134: 1615–1622.
41.
SharmaVMorganPMChengEY.Factors influencing early rehabilitation after THA: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res2009; 467: 1400–1411.
42.
FacklerCDPossR.Dislocation in total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res1980; 151: 169–178.
43.
PatelPDPottsAFroimsonMI.The dislocating hip arthroplasty: prevention and treatment. J Arthroplasty2007; 22(Suppl. 1): 86–90.
44.
BerryDJvon KnochMSchleckCDet al. Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2005; 87: 2456–2463.
45.
AllenCLHooperGJFramptonCM.Do larger heads improve the functional outcome in total hip arthroplasty?J Arthroplasty2014; 29: 401–404.
46.
ShahSMWalterWLTaiSMet al. late dislocations after total hip arthroplasty: is the bearing a factor?J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 2852–2856.
47.
DarrithBCourtneyPMDella ValleCJ. Outcomes of dual mobility components in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. Bone Joint J2018; 100: 11–19.
48.
KennedyJGRogersWBSoffeKEet al. Effect of acetabular component orientation on recurrent dislocation, pelvic osteolysis, polyethylene wear, and component migration. J Arthroplasty1998; 13: 530–534.
49.
BerryDJvon KnochMSchleckCDet al. The cumulative long-term risk of dislocation after primary Charnley total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2004; 86: 9–14.
50.
HedlundhUAhnfeltLHybbinetteCHet al. Surgical experience related to dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br1996; 78: 206–209.
51.
GausdenEBParharHSPopperJEet al. Risk factors for early dislocation following primary elective total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 1567–1571.
