title: [Survival of cementless dual mobility sockets: ten-year follow-up].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  We report a retrospective series of 106 total hip prosthesis with ten years follow-up. The purpose of this study was to analyze survival of cementless dual mobility sockets.
  
  
  METHODS
  The series included 90 consecutive patients with 106 first-intention total hip prosthesis, all with cementless dual mobility sockets. All prosthesis (Novae-1 socket and Profil-1 stem, Serf) were implanted within a 6-month period. The stainless steal socket was coated with alumina and had two short anchorage studs and a superior mooring screw and a polyethylene retentive liner. The stem had a 22.2 mm chromium cobalt head. The main indication for arthroplasty was degenerative joint disease. Mean age at implantation was 56 years (range 23-87). All patients were seen for physical examination and x-rays every two or three years. We noted cup survival at ten years (actuarial method), defining surgical revision for cup replacement due to an aseptic cause as the endpoint.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Twelve patients died during the 10-year follow-up and one was lost to follow-up. The Postel-Merle d'Aubligné score improved from 7.1 preoperatively to 15.8 at ten years. There were two isolated acetabular loosenings, two intra-prosthetic dislocations due to advanced wear of the polyethylene insert. The overall survival rate of the socket was 94.6% at ten years. There were no episodes of prosthetic instability in this series.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study demonstrates the good ten-year survival of the dual mobility socket, comparable to that of conventional prostheses. The absence of any case of prosthetic instability in this series confirms the good short-term and long-term stability of the dual mobility socket. Intraprosthetic dislocation, due to loss of the polyethylene retaining ring is the main limitation of this method. The incidence was however low (2% at ten years) and treatment was not a problem. We recommend using the dual-mobility socket as the first-intention implant for patients with a high risk of post-operative instability, but also recommend it for all patients aged over 70 years since instability is the leading cause of surgical revision after this age.
authors.affiliation: Service de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique, Pavilion 1-3, Hôpital Bellevue, boulevard Pasteur, 42055 Saint-Etienne Cedex 2.
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Philippot
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Adam
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Farizon
authors.forename: M H
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Fessy
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Bousquet
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000535:Aluminum; D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D002858:Chromium Alloys; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006622:Hip Prosthesis; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D011095:Polyethylenes; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013193:Stainless Steel; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D002858:Chromium Alloys; D011095:Polyethylenes; D013193:Stainless Steel; D000535:Aluminum