Dual Mobility Articulation in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An American Joint Replacement Registry Analysis of Patients Aged 65 years and Older

Background: Increasingly, dual mobility (DM) articulations have been used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), which may prevent postoperative hip instability. The purpose of this study was to report on outcomes of DM implants used in revision THA from the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR). Methods: Revision THA cases performed between 2012 and 2018 Medicare were eligible and categorized by 3 articulations: DM, <= 32 mm, and >= 36 mm femoral heads. The AJRR-sourced revision THA cases were linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) claims data to supplement (re)revision cases not captured in the AJRR. Patient and hospital characteristics were described and modeled as covariates. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models, considering competing risk of mortalities, hazard ratios were estimated for all-cause re-revision and re-revision for instability. Of 20,728 revision THAs, 3,043 (14.7%) received a DM, 6,565 (31.7%) a <= 32 mm head, and 11,120 (53.6%) a >= 36 mm head. Results: At 8-year follow-up, the cumulative all-cause re-revision rate for <= 32 mm heads was 21.9% (95%-confidence interval (CI) 20.2%-23.7%) and significantly (P <.0001) higher than DM (16.5%, 95%-CI 15.0%-18.2%) and >= 36 mm heads (15.2%, 95%-CI 14.2%-16.3%). At 8-year follow-up, >= 36 heads had significantly (P <.0001) lower hazard of re-revision for instability (3.3%, 95%-CI 2.9%-3.7%) while the DM (5.4%, 95%-CI 4.5%-6.5%) and <= 32 mm groups (8.6%, 95%-CI 7.7%-9.6%) had higher rates. Conclusion: The DM bearings are associated with lower rates of revision for instability compared to patients who had <= 32 mm heads and higher revision rates for >= 36 mm heads. These results may be biased due to unidentified covariates associated with implant selection. (c) 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc.