Outcomes of total hip arthroplasty using dual-mobility cups for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Femoral neck fractures (FNFs), with up to 15% mortality, are prominent orthopaedic emergencies. After treating FNFs, dislocation is another challenge increasing morbidity, mortality and treatment costs substantially. The emerging dual-mobility cup (DMC) may decrease dislocation rates following total hip arthroplasty (THA) for FNFs. We performed a systematic review of literature reporting dislocation and mortality rates with DMC-THA for the treatment of FNFs. Methods: 2 authors independently searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Google Scholar and Cochrane library for studies reporting dislocation and mortality rates for FNFs treated with DMC-THA since inception up to January 2019. Data on outcomes of interest was extracted from all studies and assessed for eligibility for a meta-analysis. Results: Out of 522 search results, 18 studies were included in the systematic review and 4 in the meta-analysis. The mean rate of dislocation following DMC-THA for FNFs was found to be 1.87% ± 2.11, with a 1-year mortality rate of 14.0% ± 10.55. Results of meta-analysis showed that dislocation and 1-year postoperative mortality rates were significantly lower for DMC-THA with a risk ratio 0.31 (95% CI, 0.16–0.59; I 2 = 0%, p = 0.0003) and 0.55 (0.40, 0.77; I 2 = 0%, p = 0.003) respectively when compared to biploar hemiathroplasty (BHA). Conclusions: The mean dislocation and mortality rates in DMC-THA are lower than previously reported rates for THA with single cup and comparable to unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Further research involving randomised control trials to assess differences in outcomes, longevity and cost-effectiveness needs to be conducted to make recommendations for the use of DMC in treating FNFs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".