Dual-mobility bearings reduce instability but may not be the only answer in revision total hip arthroplasty for recurrent dislocation.

Aims: There is little information in the literature about the use of dual-mobility (DM) bearings in preventing re-dislocation in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to compare the use of DM bearings, standard bearings, and constrained liners in revision THA for recurrent dislocation, and to identify risk factors for re-dislocation. Methods: We reviewed 86 consecutive revision THAs performed for dislocation between August 2012 and July 2019. A total of 38 revisions (44.2%) involved a DM bearing, while 39 (45.3%) and nine (10.5%) involved a standard bearing and a constrained liner, respectively. Rates of re-dislocation, re-revision for dislocation, and overall re-revision were compared. Radiographs were assessed for the positioning of the acetabular component, the restoration of the centre of rotation, leg length, and offset. Risk factors for re-dislocation were determined by Cox regression analysis. The modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHSs) were recorded. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (43 to 88); 54 were female (62.8%). The mean follow-up was 5.0 years (2.0 to 8.75). Results: DM bearings were used significantly more frequently in elderly patients (p = 0.003) and in hips with abductor deficiency (p < 0.001). The re-dislocation rate was 13.2% for DM bearings compared with 17.9% for standard bearings, and 22.2% for constrained liners (p = 0.432). Re-revision-free survival for DM bearings was 84% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.91) compared with 74% (95% CI 0.67 to 0.81) for standard articulations, and 67% (95% CI 0.51 to 0.82) for constrained liners (p = 0.361). Younger age (hazard ratio (HR) 0.92 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.99); p = 0.031), lower comorbidity (HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.95); p = 0.037), smaller heads (HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.99); p = 0.046), and retention of the acetabular component (HR 8.26 (95% CI 1.37 to 49.96); p = 0.022) were significantly associated with re-dislocation. All DM bearings which re-dislocated were in patients with abductor muscle deficiency (HR 48.34 (95% CI 0.03 to 7,737.98); p = 0.303). The radiological analysis did not reveal a significant relationship between restoration of the geometry of the hip and re-dislocation. The mean mHHSs significantly improved from 43 points (0 to 88) to 67 points (20 to 91; p < 0.001) at the final follow-up, with no differences between the types of bearing. Conclusion: We found that the use of DM bearings reduced the rates of re-dislocation and re-revision in revision THA for recurrent dislocation, but did not guarantee stability. Abductor deficiency is an important predictor of persistent instability.

Gram negative periprosthetic hip infection: nearly 25% same pathogen infection persistence at a mean of 2 years.

PURPOSE: While gram negative (GN) periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) have previously been described as difficult to treat pathogens with high rates of reinfection, limited investigations have addressed midterm outcomes and risk of infection persistence by the same pathogen. This study analyzed (1) baseline demographics, treatment strategy, and midterm outcomes of GN PJIs, as well as (2) differences in reinfection and relapse rates compared to gram positive (GP) PJIs. METHODS: We identified 29 patients that were revised for 30 GN PJIs of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) between 2010 and 2020 using a university-based hip registry. Mean age was 77 years, 63% were females (19), and mean BMI was 27 kg/m2. Major causative pathogens included Escherichia coli (12), Klebsiella pneumoniae (5), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5), and Enterobacter cloacae complex (5). Mean follow-up was 3.5 years. Study outcomes included (1) Kaplan-Meier survivorship analyses of all 30 GN PJIs, and (2) comparison of 18 two-stage exchanges for GN PJIs and 104 two-stage exchanges for GP PJIs, performed during the time from 2013 to 2017. RESULTS: (1) The 5-year survivorship free of recurrent PJI was 69%, and there were 7 recurrent PJIs at a mean of 2 years. There were 2 further suprafascial wound infections, resulting in a 61% survivorship free of any infection at 5-years. At a mean of 2 years, there were 7 patients with reinfection by the same GN pathogen (6 PJIs, one wound infection) as at index revision (23%). (2) Following two-stage exchange, the 5-year survivorship free of recurrent PJI (GN: 74%; GP: 91%; p = 0.072), any infection (GN: 61%; GP: 91%; p = 0.001), and reinfection by the same pathogen was significantly lower among GN PJIs (GN: 73%; GP: 98%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients revised for GN PJIs are at increased risk of reinfection as opposed to GP infections. Affected patients must be counseled on the exceptionally high risk of infection persistence with one in four developing relapses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III.