الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 100 |  |  |
| | | from | 100 | | |
Abstract
Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty is the second most common problematic complication after cup loosening. There are many factors that affect prosthesis instability including patient related factors as: gender (increases with females), age (increases with elderly), body characteristics (height), it increase with hip fractures, previous hip surgery and neuromuscular disorders. Related to surgical technique as component orientation, soft tissue tension and trochanteric non union. Related to implant design as head size, neck design, head size ratio, femoral offset and acetabular liner design.
Options for hip dislocation includes closed reduction and bracing in first place. If this fail, there are many surgical options according to cause of dislocation including girdle stone joint, dual mobility and constrained acetabular cups.
We conducted a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis comparing between results of dual mobility cup and constrained acetabular cup for treatment of dislocated total hip arthroplasty. The search conducted by using the databases: Cochrane library, JBJS {Journal of bone and joint Surgery}, PubMed and Google scholar for published studies from 1998-2018.
In our review there is 1898 patients (1910 hips) that underwent different treatment modalities for dislocated total hip arthroplasty. We need to know if there is a difference between dual mobility cup and constrained acetabular cup in treatment of dislocated total hip arthroplasty. We compared between 18 studies in 4 clinical outcomes which are: Rate of re-dislocation, Rate of re-revision, Rate of definite aseptic loosening of acetabular cup, and clinical comparison by Harris hip score.
According to our results we found that there is difference between Dual mobility cup and constrained acetabular cup in rate of re-dislocation (p value< 0.001 (Highly Significant)), Rate of re-revision (p value< 0.001 (Highly Significant)), Rate of definite aseptic loosening of acetabular cup (p value< 0.001 (Highly Significant)), and Harris hip score (p value< 0.001 (Highly Significant)).
Results show that dual mobility cup has less rate of re-dislocation with 31 (2.3%) re-dislocated cups for dual mobility cup and with 38 (6.6%) re-dislocated cups for constrained acetabular cup. And less rate of re-revision than constrained acetabular cup with 81 (6.1%) re-revised cups for dual mobility cup and with 75 (13.1%) re-revised cups for constrained acetabular cup, less rate of definite aseptic loosening of acetabular cup with 11 (0.8%) loosened cups for dual mobility cup and with 24 (4.2%) loosened cups for constrained acetabular cup, dual mobility cups are more in Harris hip score with mean score 85.87 ± 1.71 for dual mobility cup and mean score 77.90 ± 3.28 for constrained acetabular cup.