Abstract

As a common surgery for femoral neck fractures, total hip replacement (THR) has been performed widely. While standard THR has been predominant for many years, the use of dual mobility replacement (DMR) has also become a suitable alternative that could offer more stability. Even though the utilization of these techniques is increasing, comparative studies evaluating the short-term outcomes of both techniques in femoral neck fractures are rare. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term functional outcomes and dislocation rates in patients taking treatment of femoral neck fracture with dual mobility (DM) and conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA). A retrospective case series of 80 patients was conducted to compare the two groups (Group A: Traditional THR, and Group B: DMR). Clinical information, such as patient age, gender, postoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS), and dislocations were gained from outpatient follow-up records. The range of motion (ROM) was also assessed. There was no statistically significant difference in Harris Hip Scores between the two groups (p > 0.05). Dislocation events were rare and similar between groups, with two cases in Group A and none in Group B, showing no significant difference (p > 0.05). However, patients in the DMR group demonstrated a significantly better range of motion compared to those in the conventional THR group (p < 0.05). Dual mobility and conventional THR offer comparable short-term outcomes in terms of dislocation risk and functional recovery. However, DMR may provide superior range of motion, making it a favorable which types of patients are more suitable.

Key words: Total hip replacement, neck femur fractures, conventional total hip replacement, dual mobility hip replacement, range of motion, Harris Hip Score