Background

 

THA dislocationTHA dislocation

 

Incidence

 

van Erp et al Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2022

- systematic review of 174 studies and 5 million THA

- overall incidence of dislocation 1.7%

- reducing over time

- dislocation rate 2010 - 2020 0.7%

 

Factors

 

Kunutsor et al Lancet Rheum 2019

- meta-analysis of risk factors for dislocation

- 125 studies and 4.5 million THA

Patient factors Surgical factors
AVN / RA / neck of femur fractures Surgeon experience
Revision THA Surgical approach

Females

Elevated BMI

Medical co-morbidities (ASA 3)

Neurological conditions

Psychiatric disorders

Implant factors

- component position

- femoral head size

- elevated liners

- dual mobility

Abnormal spinopelvic motion

Soft tissue balancing

- offset and LLD

  Impingement

 

Surgical factors

 

1.  Surgeon Experience

 

Hedlund et al JBJB Br 1996

- 4000 THA at once centre

- dislocation rate 2 x with < 30 THA per year

 

2.  Approach

 

Koster et al J Orthop Trauma Rehab 2023

- meta-analysis of 11 studies and 2,000 patients undergoing THA

- overall dislocation rates 0.8%

- posterior 1.4% / anterior 0.4% / lateral 0% (non-significant differences)

 

Steenbergen et al Hip Int 2023

- Dutch registry of 270,000 THA

- posterior 1.4% / anterior 0.4% / lateral 0.6%

 

3.  Component position

 

Dislocated THR Open Acetabulum

 

Acetabular safe zones

- inclination 40 +/- 10o

- anteversion 15 - 30o

 

Abdel et al CORR 2016

- 9800 hips

- evaluated Lewinnek safe zone

- cup inclination 40+/-10

- cup anteversion 15+/-10

- 58% of dislocations had cup position within safe zone

 

4.  Component design

 

A.  Increased head size

 

THR Big Head Dislocation

 

Increased size increases head-neck ratio

- reduces impingement / increases arc of motion

- increased jump distance

 

Zijlstra et al Acta Orthop 2017

- Dutch Registry of 166,000 hips

- dislocation rates higher with 22 - 28 mm heads compared to 32 mm heads

- 36 mm heads reduced dislocation rates with posterolateral approach

 

B. Acetabular liners

 

Posterior elevate liner

Stryker elevated liner

 

Posteriorly elevated profiles

- i.e. neutral liners v 10o elevated rim liners

- ? more common in posterior approach

 

Davis et al, BJJ 2021

- 213 THRs on UK registry

- asymmetric liners have lower revision rate

- both overall revision, and revision specifically for dislocation

 

Cobb et al JBJS Am 1996

- 5000 THA

- elevated liners reduced dislocation rate

 

C.  Dual mobility

 

Romagnoli et al Int Orthop 2019

- systematic review of 15 studies and 2400 patients

- comparison of dual mobility with standard THA

- reduced risk of dislocation with dual mobility

 

5.  Soft tissue tension

 

A.  Restore LLD and offset

- reduced offset associated with increased dislocation

- reduces soft tissue tension

- increases risk of impingement

 

B. Capsular Management

 

Kobayashi et al Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2023

- systematic review of capsular resection versus capsular repair

- lower dislocation and better HHS with capsular repair

 

6. Impingement

- remove osteophytes

- restore LLD and offset

- always put hip through ROM

- ensure in full extension and ER, no posterior impingement between neck an

- ensure in flexion 90o and IR, no anterior impingement

 

Patient factors

 

Spinopelvic mobility

 

Abnormal spinopelvic motion from lumbar pathology can lead to increased dislocation risk

- impingement from decreased pelvic motion

- impingement from compensatory femoral motion

- ongoing spinal degeneration can alter relative cup position

- spinal surgery can alter relative cup position

- spinal deformity on table can alter perceived pelvis landmarks

 

Gausden et al, J Arthroplasty 2018

- USA registry review of > 200,000 THRs

- strongest risk factor for dislocation was prior spinal fusion

 

Onggo et al, Eur Spine J 2021

- meta-analysis (n=69,438) comparing prior vs subsequent lumbar fusion

- lumbar fusion is risk factor for dislocation, regardless of timing (before or after) 

 

Management

- not yet born out with clinical evidence

- functional imaging (EOS or XR) to compare pelvic parameters (pelvic tilt, sacral slope) sitting and standing

- CT navigation or robotics can be used to identify impingement / accurately place implants

- consideration of dual mobility

 

Positions

 

Posterior dislocation

- hip flexed, adducted, internally rotated

 

THA posterior dislocation

Posterior dislocation

 

Anterior dislocation

- hip extended, adducted, externally rotation

 

THR Anterior Dislocation

Anterior dislocation