Dislocation as a primary cause of revision has been on the increase in Sweden (14% in 2014). The increasing use of Dual Mobility cups (DMC) could well be explained by the increased revision burden due to dislocation, patients undergoing revision having increased comorbidities and reports that dual articular cup designs reduce the risk of dislocation. The aim of this study was to analyze the change in utilization pattern of the dual articular designs used in acetabular revision surgery in Sweden. The short-term survival of DMC was compared to traditional designs. During years 2004–2014, 1111 (925 cemented) revisions performed with a DMC design were reported to SHAR. About half (n=426) of these cases were first time revisions performed due to dislocation. During the same time period 520 dislocations were revised for dislocation using a standard cemented cup. There was no differences regarding the age, gender and primary diagnosis (p≥0.12) between the two groups. A second cup revision for all reasons and specifically for dislocation was used as end-point. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed.Introduction
Patients/Materials & Methods
We analysed impaction bone grafting used together with cemented or uncemented fixation in acetabular revision surgery. The overall risk for re-revision did not differ between the cemented and uncemented group. However, aseptic loosening was more common in the cemented group. Several surgical techniques address bone defects in cup revision surgery. Bone impaction grafting, introduced more than thirty years ago, is a biologically and mechanically appealing method. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of bone impaction grafting when used with uncemented and cemented fixation in cup revision surgery. Uncemented cups resting on more than 50% host bone were used as controls.Summary Statement
Background
