# Femoral Neck Design Does Not Impact Revision Risk After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Dual Mobility Cup

**Authors:** Bart van Dooren, Rinne M. Peters, David Visser, Liza N. van Steenbergen, P Koen Bos, Wierd P. Zijlstra

PMC · DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2023.101281 · Arthroplasty Today · 2024-01-13

## TL;DR

This study found that the design of the femoral neck does not affect the risk of revision surgery for hip implants using dual mobility cups.

## Contribution

It is the first to show that femoral neck design is not linked to revision risk in dual mobility hip implants.

## Key findings

- The 5- and 10-year revision rates for dual mobility cups were 0.5% and 1.9%, respectively.
- Femoral neck design features like alloy, geometry, and surface roughness had no impact on revision risk.

## Abstract

The use of dual mobility (DM) cups has increased quickly. It is hypothesized that femoral neck taper geometry may be involved in the risk of prosthetic impingement and DM cup revision. We aim to (1) explore the reasons for revision of DM cups or head/liners and (2) explore whether certain femoral neck characteristics are associated with a higher risk of revision of DM cups.

Primary total hip arthroplasties with a DM cup registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register between 2007 and 2021 were identified (n = 7603). Competing risk survival analyses were performed, with acetabular component and head/liner revision as the primary endpoint. Reasons for revision were categorized in cup-/liner-related revisions (dislocation, liner wear, acetabular loosening). Femoral neck characteristics were studied to assess whether there is an association between femoral neck design and the risk of DM cup/liner revision. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed.

The 5- and 10-year crude cumulative incidence of DM cup or head/liner revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening was 0.5% (CI 0.4-0.8) and 1.9% (CI 1.3-2.8), respectively. After adjusting for confounders, we found no association between the examined femoral neck characteristics (alloy used, neck geometry, CCD angle, and surface roughness) and the risk for revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening.

The risk of DM cup or head/liner revision for dislocation, wear, and acetabular loosening was low. We found no evidence that there is an association between femoral neck design and the risk of cup or head/liner revision.

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** acetabular loosening (OMIM:142700), femoral neck impingement (MESH:D005265), IPD (MESH:D004204), postoperative dislocations (MESH:D019106), PE wear (MESH:D057085), DM (MESH:D009105), Hip (MESH:D025981), periprosthetic fracture (MESH:D057068), death (MESH:D003643), cup (MESH:C536557), neck impingement (MESH:D006258), osteoarthritis (MESH:D010003), aseptic loosening (MESH:D011475), ASA (MESH:C000719191), THA dislocation (MESH:D006617), PE impingement (MESH:D019534), infection (MESH:D007239)
- **Chemicals:** DM (-), titanium (MESH:D014025), PE (MESH:D020959), PRO (MESH:D011392), stainless steel (MESH:D013193), cobalt chrome (MESH:D002858)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10826135/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10826135/full.md

## References

39 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10826135/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC10826135