Dual-Mobility Acetabular Components in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Do Not Increase the Risk of Complication Compared to Conventional Articulations: A Matched Cohort Comparative Analysis

BackgroundA recent National Joint Registry report suggests a higher local complication risk for dual-mobility (DM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared to conventional articulation THA. This report may be subject to data heterogeneity with multiple confounders. Controlling for these factors by matching demographic characteristics may give different results. We aim to compare 2-year local complication rates between matched DM and conventional THAs in primary hip osteoarthritis.MethodsData were collected for consecutive primary THAs undertaken via a posterior approach. The conventional articulation and DM cohorts were matched 3:1 for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiology grade, body mass index, and operative time using a propensity score and nearest neighbor matching method. Outcome measures were 2-year local complication rates, reoperation rates, systemic complication rates, and mortality rates. Demographic and outcome data were compared, and cumulative survival rates (%) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology with a 2-year local complication as the endpoint. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.ResultsFour hundred twelve THAs were included: 309 conventional and 103 DM articulations. There were no statistically significant differences between DM and conventional articulation THAs for local complications (7 6.8% vs 23 7.4%, P = .820), reoperations (3 2.9% vs 4 1.3%, P = .374), systemic complications (3 2.9% vs 4 1.3%, P = .374), or 90-day mortality (1 1% vs 2 0.6%, P = 1.000). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated similar 2-year survival rates for conventional THAs compared to DM THAs (93.3% standard error, 0.014 vs 91.9% standard error, 0.031, P = .906).ConclusionsThis matched study shows that there is no difference in local complication rates between DM and conventional THA articulations.