Local recurrence, survival and function after total femur resection and megaprosthetic reconstruction for bone sarcomas

Postoperative Outcomes of Total Femur Replacement in Oncologic and Nononcologic Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Total femur replacement (TFR) is used for primary reconstruction after extensive tumor resection or as a revision surgery due to prosthetic failure. Studies on TFR rates of failure and functional outcomes are scarce. The purpose of our study was to compare the modes of failure, amputation rates, and functional outcomes after TFR between oncologic and nononcologic patients.

METHODS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were for this manuscript. Our study was registered on PROSPERO (413582). Quality assessment of all studies was performed using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist. Endoprosthesis failure was assessed using the Henderson classification and functional outcomes using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score. Weighted means and standard deviations were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall failure rate was similar between groups. Henderson type 4 failures were more common within the nononcologic group, while the others were more frequently found in the oncologic group. Overall amputation rate was higher in the oncologic group mainly due to type 5 failure. Amputations occurred mainly after type 4 and type 5 failures. Functional outcome was better within the oncologic group (70.5 versus 61.7, respectively; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Total femoral replacement in the oncologic and nononcologic group is associated with a high rate of failure (31% and 32.5%, respectively). Overall amputation rate was higher in the oncologic group mainly due to type 5 failure. Functional outcome was better within the oncologic group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

What Are the Complication Rates and Factors Associated With Total Femur Replacement After Tumor Resection? Findings From the Japanese Musculoskeletal Oncology Group

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing massive tumor resection and total femur replacement (TFR) face a substantial risk of hip dislocation and infection, often resulting in multiple implant revisions or hip disarticulation. These complications can impact their independence and prognosis. Additionally, their shorter life expectancy is influenced by challenges in achieving local radical resection and controlling metastases. Identifying suitable candidates for TFR is vital, necessitating investigations into dislocation, infection, implant failure rates, local recurrence, overall survival, and associated factors.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the postsurgical complication (hip dislocation and infection) rate and factors associated with postsurgical complications in patients who underwent TFR after tumor resection? (2) What is the local recurrence rate, implant failure rate, overall survival rate, and factors associated with local recurrence and implant failure?

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 42 patients (median [range] age 47 years [10 to 79 years]) who underwent TFR and tumor resection at the time of the same surgical procedure between 1990 and 2020 at 12 registered institutions that specialized in tumor treatment in Japan. A total of 55% (23) of the patients were men, and 79% (33) had bone sarcoma. The median (range) follow-up period was 36.5 months (2 to 327 months). Of the 42 patients, 12% (5) were lost to follow-up before 2 years without meeting a study endpoint (postsurgical complications, revision, or amputation), and another 19% (8) died before 2 years with implants intact, leaving 69% (29) of the original group who had either follow-up of at least 2 years or met a study endpoint before the minimum surveillance duration. Another 10% (4) had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up but had not been seen in the past 5 years. Infection was defined as deep-seated infection involving soft tissues, bones, joints, and the area around the implant. We did not consider superficial infections. Implant failure was defined when a patient underwent reimplantation or amputation. The complication and implant failure rates were assessed by the cumulative incidence function method, considering competing events. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the overall survival rate.

RESULTS

The 1-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year dislocation rates were 5%, 12%, 14%, and 14%, respectively. The 1-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year infection rates were 5%, 7%, 10%, and 15%, respectively. Multivariable analyses for hip dislocation and infection revealed that resection of the abductor muscles and large tumor size were positively associated with hip dislocation. The 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year local recurrence rates were 5%, 15%, and 15%, respectively. The 6-month, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year implant failure rates were 5% (95% confidence interval 1% to 15%), 7% (95% CI 2% to 18%), 16% (95% CI 6% to 29%), and 16% (95% CI 6% to 29%), respectively. Multivariable analyses of local recurrence and implant failure that led to reimplantation or amputation revealed that a positive surgical margin was positively associated with local recurrence. The 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year overall patient survival rates were 95% (95% CI 87% to 102%), 77% (95% CI 64% to 91%), and 64% (95% CI 48% to 81%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Hip dislocation, infection, and local recurrence were frequently observed in patients who received massive tumor resection and TFR in our study, eventually leading to reimplantation or amputation. Preserving the abductor muscles and resecting the tumor with a wide margin can prevent postoperative dislocation and local recurrence. Future research should focus on patient selection criteria, prevention of hip dislocation, and innovative treatments.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Functional audit of the use of megaprosthesis for limb reconstruction in musculoskeletal tumors - A retrospective single-center study

Introduction

Medical advancements in musculoskeletal oncology has significantly reduced the mortality rate associated with limb-sparing surgery, making it comparable to amputation. The use of modular megaprosthesis for sarcoma treatment has now become a standard practice. However, these non-biological implants are not without their complications.

Materials and methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all patients who underwent wide resection of locally aggressive and malignant bone tumors, followed by reconstruction with megaprosthesis between January 2018 and January 2023 at tertiary care hospital. Patients were evaluated based on oncological outcomes, functional outcomes, and complications with a minimum follow-up period of 6 months.

Results

The study included a total of 30 patients, comprising 16 males and 14 females, with a mean age of 33.6 ± 15.6 years. They all underwent wide resection and reconstruction with megaprosthesis. Diagnosis among the patients included 19 cases of giant cell tumors, 5 cases of osteosarcomas, 2 cases of metastatic bone tumors, and 1 case each of chondrosarcoma, malignant fibrous histiocytoma, multiple myeloma, and chondromyxoid fibroma. These tumors were predominantly located in the distal femur (15 patients) and proximal tibia (12 patients). The average follow-up period was 33 ± 21 months, resulting in an average final Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score of 81 % ± 9 %. Complications were observed in 21 patients, with infection being the most common, specifically Type 4 (10 patients, 37 %), followed by Type 1 (4 patients, 13 %) and Type 3 (4 patients, 13 %). Two patients (7 %) experienced Type 5 complications, while three succumbed to their illnesses. Additionally, two patients required amputation, one due to local recurrence and the other due to a deep-seated infection.

Conclusion

Megaprosthesis is a viable reconstruction option following wide resection of bone tumors. Infection remains the most common issue, and cost poses a significant challenge.

Study on the effect of artificial joint replacement for osteosarcoma

Osteosarcoma is one of the most prevalent primary malignant bone tumors that affects teenagers more than adults. In recent years, artificial femoral replacement has become more and more common. The use of artificial total femoral replacement surgery prevents the need for amputating the damaged limb, preserves the patient's ability to move and bear weight on the leg, lessens the severity of the psychological trauma, and significantly raises the patient's quality of life. To explore the treatment methods and therapeutic effects of artificial femoral replacement in the treatment of femoral osteosarcoma. The clinical data of 11 patients with femoral malignant tumors who underwent artificial femoral replacement from January 2019 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 7 males and 4 females, 11 to 40 years old, average 19.36 ± 9.44 years old. The disease duration is 2 to 7 months, with an average of 4.7 months. Before and 3 months after operation, the patients who had tumors were given a score on the visual analog scale, and their quality of life was also measured. At the most recent follow-up, both the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score and the Harris hip score were analyzed. Eleven patients were followed up for 6 to 58 months, and an average of 21 months. Complications such as wound infection, joint dislocation, and nerve damage did not occur. In 1 patient, popliteal vein thrombus formation, and in 2 patients with osteosarcoma died from tumor progression. Visual analog scale score at 3 months after surgery and the quality-of-life scores were 3.68 ± 1.39 and 40.04 ± 4.31, respectively, which were significantly improved compared to before surgery (5.94 ± 1.19 and 22.42 ± 3.63, respectively, P < .05). At the last interview, Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score is scored from 18 to 29 points, average 22.5 ± 5.9 points, and Harris hip score is scored from 42 to 90 points, with an average score of 69.0 ± 14.7. Artificial total femoral replacement is an effective limb salvage operation in the treatment of osteosarcoma.

A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Limb Salvage Surgery Using Mega Prosthesis in Bone Tumours at a Tertiary Care Centre in Eastern India

Background

The method known as "limb salvage surgery" (LSS) aids in the removal of extremity tumours, and reconstruction is completed with satisfactory oncologic, functional, and cosmetic outcomes. Oncologic clearance is given first priority, followed by functional outcomes. Worldwide, the trend has already shifted away from amputations and toward limb salvage surgery for eligible patients due to efficient chemotherapy regimens, improved imaging techniques, precise administration of enhanced radiation, better reconstructive choices, and developments in bio-engineering. The purpose of the present study was to determine the clinicopathological characteristics, surgical techniques, functional outcome, and prognostic factors of limb salvage surgery performed using mega prosthesis in primary malignant or benign resectable tumours.

Methods

Our retrospective cohort study was carried out over a period of two years and included 28 patients who received care for bone tumours. The data gathered comprised the demographic profile, clinical characteristics, histological characteristics, treatments given, functional results, and survival. LSS was performed on all patients by orthopaedics oncologists trained in the surgical oncology department. Following surgery, during the first two years, patients were examined at every three-month interval, then every six months until the fifth year, and then once a year after that. The Kaplan-Meier method was utilized to determine the median follow-up and recurrence-free survival (RFS).

Results

In our study, the mean age of study subjects was 30.0±10.9 years. Almost all of the subjects included in the study had lower limb bone tumours (96.4%). The most common site for the tumour was the distal femur (57.1%) followed by the proximal femur (32.2%). The most common type of benign tumour was giant cell tumour (GCT) (53.6%), including recurrences of giant cell tumour (GCT), and among malignant tumours, osteosarcoma was the most common (25.0%). The mean surgical resection of bone in limb salvage surgery was 125.2±24.2 mm. The most common post-operative complication was leg length discrepancy (LLD) among 25.0% of subjects, which was managed by shoe raise. The overall mean musculoskeletal tumour society (MTSS) score after LSS was 25.0±4.3. Using the Kaplan-Meier method analysis, we found that relapse-free survival was 83.7% among enrolled subjects at a median follow-up period of 80 months.

Conclusion

It can be difficult to surgically treat patients who have malignant bone tumours. In limb-sparing surgery for bone tumours, the modular segmental-replacement system prosthesis that we preferred produced satisfactory results in terms of tumour control and limb function. To get good long-term results, the case selection must be appropriate.

Evaluation of tumor-prostheses over time: Complications, functional outcome, and comparative statistical analysis after resection and reconstruction in orthopedic oncologic conditions in the lower extremities

Objectives:

Previous multicenter studies report variable outcomes and failure rates after tumor-prosthetic reconstructions. The purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate implant survival, limb survival, and functional outcome in a cohort of patients who underwent resection of primary malignancies or aggressive benign bone tumors and reconstruction with modern tumor-prostheses in the lower extremities and (2) to provide comparison to a historical cohort on previous generations of tumor-prostheses from the same center.

Methods:

A longitudinal retrospective single-center study of 72 consecutive patients (F/M = 30/42), mean age = 44 (range = 7–84) years with bone, soft tissue sarcoma adjacent to bone (n = 69), and aggressive benign bone tumors (n = 3) having surgery between 2006 and 2016 with bone resection and reconstruction with tumor-prostheses were compared to a historical cohort from1985 to 2005. Revisions were classified as major and minor revisions. Causes of failure were classified according to the Henderson classification. Fine and Gray competing risk analysis was used for assessing cumulative incidence for implant revision and limb amputation. Functional outcome was evaluated with Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score system.

Results:

Forty-seven patients were alive at the end of the study. Mean follow-up was 6 years (range = 2–13 years). Ten-year cumulative risk of major revision was 18% (95% confidence interval = 9%–28%). Deep infection and recurrence of tumor caused most revisions in modern tumor-prostheses. Ten-year cumulative incidence of limb amputation was 11% (95% confidence interval = 3%–18%). According to the Henderson classification, the overall predominant failure mode was non-mechanical (n = 20, 51%). Mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score was 20 (67%) (range = 0–30).

Conclusion:

A minimum of 2 years follow-up with modern modular tumor-prostheses demonstrated a relatively low risk of implant failure and amputation and also an acceptable functional outcome. No statistical difference of, implant survival, limb survival and functional outcome between tumor-prostheses over two time periods was observed, possibly explained by Type 2 error.

Implant survival and functional results of endoprosthetic reconstruction for proximal femoral metastases with pathological fractures

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the patient and implant survival, clinical and functional outcomes, and the rate of complications resulting in reconstruction failure following endoprosthetic reconstruction (EPR) of extensive proximal femoral metastases associated with actual or impending pathological fractures.

METHODS

A total of 111 patients with actual or impending pathological fractures due to metastatic disease of the proximal femur were treated with EPR between 2003 and 2018. Staged surgery, bilateral EPR, was performed in 3 cases. The patients comprised 51 females and 60 males with a mean age of 52.1 ± 12.3 years. The patient and implant survival were recorded. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed by using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) functional scoring, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS). The different types of abductor mechanism repair were evaluated by functional tests and existence of Trendelenburg gait at postoperative follow-ups. The complications resulting in reconstruction failure were investigated.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 23.1 ± 17.9 months. The overall survival of patients after EPR was 89% at 6 months, 72% at 1 year and 10% at 5 years. The estimated 1- and 5-year overall implant survival was 100% and 97.3% (95% CI, 0.95-0.98), respectively, as the endpoint was defined as complete removal of the prosthesis. Median VAS score before endoprosthetic replacement was 8 and after 3 months 4. Before surgery, the median MSTS score was 40 (30-56.6%) and the median KPS score was 40 (30-50). Postoperative third month, the median MSTS score was 56.6 (53.3-86.6%) and the median KPS score was 60 (40-70). Functional scores were superior in trochanter major split osteotomized group compared to trochanter major removed group. Trendelenburg gait was seen in 20 (17.5%) patients postoperatively. There were 10 (8.7%) complications resulting in reconstruction failure.

CONCLUSION

Endoprosthetic replacement can provide a durable fixation with high implant survival rate and good clinical and functional results in extensive proximal femoral metastases associated with a pathological fracture.

Implant Survival, Clinical Outcome and Complications of Megaprosthetic Reconstructions Following Sarcoma Resection

Simple Summary

Malignant bone and soft tissue tumors are usually surgically removed with an envelope of healthy tissue as a barrier. If located in the long bones of the upper and lower extremity, this approach leads to a large bone defect commonly affecting a joint. One way to rebuild the bone defect and the neighboring joint is the use of a megaprosthesis that is anchored in the remaining bone comparable to a conventional joint replacement. In general this approach is popular as it provides early stability and allows the affected patient to begin rehabilitation early on. However, complications leading to long-term unplanned reoperation are common. This article provides an overview of current implant survival, types of complication and long-term outcomes of megaprostheses used following tumor resection.

Abstract

Megaprosthetic reconstruction of segmental bone defects following sarcoma resection is a frequently chosen surgical approach in orthopedic oncology. While the use of megaprostheses has gained popularity over the last decades and such implants are increasingly used for metastatic reconstructions and in non-tumor cases, there still is a high risk of long-term complications leading to revision surgery. This article investigates current implant survivorship, frequency and types of complications as well as functional outcomes of upper and lower limb megaprosthetic reconstructions.

Application and Development of Megaprostheses in Limb Salvage for Bone Tumors Around the Knee Joint

In recent decades, limb-salvage surgery has replaced amputation as the first choice for the treatment of bone tumors around knee. After tumor resection, there are a variety of reconstruction methods for us to choose, including autograft or allograft, inactivation and reimplantation, artificial prosthesis replacement, and allograft-prosthesis compound reconstruction. Compared with other reconstruction methods, artificial prosthesis reconstruction has some advantages: relatively simple, early weight bearing, fewer early complications, and good function in the early and mid-term follow-up. After decades of continuous improvements, the design of tumor prosthesis has reached a relatively mature stage, and the failure rate of prosthesis has also been declining year by year. However, artificial prostheses also have multiple complications such as infection, aseptic loosening, prosthetic breakage, and patients sometimes face the risk of revision or amputation. Therefore, clinicians need to deeply understand the characteristics of related complications and the principles of treatment.

Mid-term implant survival, functional and radiological results and mechanical complications of mega-prosthetic reconstruction around the knee with the PENTA® system

AIM

Mega-prosthetic reconstruction is the most common treatment method for massive osteoarticular defects caused by tumor resection around the knee. The new implant is a highly modular rotational-hinged megaprosthesis system with a distinct pentagonal stem geometry and variable implantation options. The aim of this study is to present the mid-term implant survival characteristics, functional and radiological results and mechanical complication profile of the new megaprosthesis.

METHODS

One hundred and one mega-prosthetic knee reconstruction procedures in 90 patients (M/F: 51/39) utilizing the new implant system were retrospectively analyzed. In 68 patients, the megaprosthesis was used for primary reconstruction following tumor resection while it was used for revision of other implants in 22. The mean age was 28.5 (7-66) years and the mean follow-up was 59.2 (24-124) months. The most common primary pathology was osteosarcoma with 63-70% patients, the most common anatomical site of involvement was the distal femur with 56-62% patients.

RESULTS

Henderson Type 2 failure (aseptic loosening) was seen in only 2-2.2% patients while Type 3 (structural failure) was seen in 29-32.2% Although the 5-year anchorage survival rate was 94.3%, overall mechanical implant survival was 76.1% at 5 years due to a relatively high failure rate in the first-generation hinge mechanism of the implant. The 5-year hinge survival rate demonstrated a significant improvement rate from 61.7% to 87.2% between the first and second generations of the implant (p = 0.027). The mean MSTS score was 24 out of 30 (14-29). The mean cumulative ISOLS radiographic score for index megaprosthesis operations was 19.7 (12-24), which corresponded to excellent outcome.

CONCLUSION

The new megaprosthesis system is a reliable choice for the reconstruction of tumor-related massive osteoarticular defects around the knee. Although long-term follow-up is necessary for a definitive evaluation of the implant's survival characteristics, midterm follow-up yields exceptional anchorage properties related to pentagonal stem geometry with very good functional outcomes.

A novel tool for predicting the survival of endoprosthesis used for reconstruction of the knee following tumor resection: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Prosthesis-related complications, after knee reconstruction with endoprosthesis during operation for tumors around the knee, remain an unresolved problem which necessitate a revision or even an amputational surgery. The purpose of the current study was to identify significant risk factors associated with implant failure, and establish a novel model to predict survival of the prosthesis in patients operated with endoprostheses for tumor around knee.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical database of our institution for patients who underwent knee reconstruction due to tumors. A total of 203 patients were included, including 123 males (60.6%) and 80 (39.4%) females, ranging in age from 14 to 77 years (mean: 34.3 ± 17.3 years). The cohort was randomly divided into training (n = 156) and validation (n = 47) samples. Univariable COX analysis was used for initially identifying potential independent predictors of prosthesis survival with the training group (p < 0.150). Multivariate COX proportional hazard model was selected to identify final significant prognostic factors. Using these significant predictors, a graphic nomogram, and an online dynamic nomogram were generated for predicting the prosthetic survival. C-index and calibration curve were used for evaluate the discrimination ability and accuracy of the novel model, both in the training and validation groups.

Results

The 1-, 5-, and 10-year prosthetic survival rates were 94.0, 90.8, and 83.0% in training sample, and 96.7, 85.8, and 76.9% in validation sample, respectively. Anatomic sites, length of resection and length of prosthetic stem were independently associated with the prosthetic failure according to multivariate COX regression model (p<0.05). Using these three significant predictors, a graphical nomogram and an online dynamic nomogram model were generated. The C-indexes in training and validation groups were 0.717 and 0.726 respectively, demonstrating favourable discrimination ability of the novel model. And the calibration curve at each time point showed favorable consistency between the predicted and actual survival rates in training and validation samples.

Conclusions

The length of resection, anatomical location of tumor, and length of prosthetic stem were significantly associated with prosthetic survival in patients operated for tumor around knee. A user-friendly novel online model model, with favorable discrimination ability and accuracy, was generated to help surgeons predict the survival of the prosthesis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08710-x.

Is the Capanna Technique a Reliable Method for Revision Surgery after Failure of Previous Limb-Salvage Surgery?

BACKGROUND

Reconstruction of a massive bone defect caused by previous failed limb-salvage surgery in patients with bone sarcoma is challenging. Many procedures have been used, but they all have their inherent disadvantages. The Capanna technique has demonstrated good functional outcomes and a low incidence of complications in primary reconstructive surgery of massive bone defect. However, few studies have focused on its usage in revision surgery after failed primary limb-salvage surgery.

METHODS

Between June 2011 and January 2017, 13 patients underwent revision surgery with the Capanna technique for reconstruction of a secondary segmental bone defect caused by a previous failed surgical procedure. The demographics, operating procedures, graft union, functional outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and postoperative complications of each patient were recorded.

RESULTS

The current study investigated 13 patients. The rate of limb salvage was 100 %. Bone union was achieved for all patients during a mean time of 8.54 ± 2.15 months (range 4-11 months) at the fibula-host bone junction and 14.92 ± 2.33 months (range 12-21 months) at the allograft-host bone junction. The postoperative complications included wound healing issues and internal fixation loosening. Allograft fracture, nonunion, and infection were not observed. All the patients achieved good functional outcomes, with a Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score of 0.86 ± 0.03 at the latest follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The Capanna technique is a reliable alternative method for revision reconstruction of a segmental bone defect caused by a previous failed surgical procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Chondrosarcoma arising in monostotic fibrous dysplasia treated with total femur resection and megaprothesis: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Fibrous dysplasia is tumor like lesions of bone which develop as substitution of bone by an expansion of fibrous connective tissue mixed with hard trabeculae. Chondrosarcomas is one of common malignant primary bone tumor derived from heterogenous group of neoplasm producing chondroid matrix. Chondrosarcoma arising in fibrous dysplasia, especially in monostotic fibrous dysplasia is a very rare case.

CASE REPORT

A 54-year-old male presented with chief complaint of pain on left thigh. Patient with history of pathological fracture on left femoral diaphysis 3 years ago due to fibrous dysplasia and had underwent curettage, open reduction, and internal fixation at other hospital. Plain radiography revealed expansive lytic lesion, interrupted periosteal reaction with plate and screw attached to the lesion, and soft tissue mass. MRI T2FS sequence showed hyperintense mass extending from subtrochanteric to distal of left femoral diaphysis. Histopathological result from biopsy suggested chondrosarcoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Malignant transformation of monostotic type was less frequently compared to polyostotic type. Among all malignant transformation cases, alteration to chondrosarcoma was more scarce than other malignancy such as osteosarcoma and fibrosarcoma. Wide surgical margin and reconstruction in chondrosarcoma provide good local control and functional outcome.

Clinical Outcome After Replacement of Distal Femur/Proximal Tibia in a Heterogeneous Patient Cohort: Function Following Tumour, Trauma, and Loosening

BACKGROUND

Distal femur and proximal tibia replacements as limb-salvage procedures with good outcome parameters for patients with tumours have been broadly described. However, the overall midterm outcome in a mixed, heterogeneous patient collective is still unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 59 consecutive patients (33 for primary and 26 for revision surgery) between 1998 and 2017. Indication for implantation was tumour (n=16), periprosthetic fracture (n=14), traumatic fracture (n=14), infection (n=10), aseptic loosening (n=3), and pathological fracture (n=2). The mean follow-up duration was 3 years. Clinical functions were evaluated by Toronto Extremity Salvage Score and Knee Society Score. Knee extension and flexion force were measured.

RESULTS

The overall survival rate of arthroplasties was 59% (n=35). Major complications were observed in 36 (61%) patients. During the follow-up period, 14 (24%) patients died. We recorded periprosthetic joint infection in 21 (36%) patients, recurrence of tumour in two (3%), and aseptic implant failure in three (5%). The mean Toronto Extremity Salvage Score was 66±33, and the mean Knee Society Score was 49±30. The mean extension force on the operated side was significantly reduced at 60° and 180° compared to the healthy side (p=0.0151 and p=0.0411, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Distal femur and proximal tibia replacements showed limited clinical function in a heterogeneous patient collective. Indication for implantation should be considered carefully.

Total Femoral Replacement- A Case Report

Total femoral replacement(TFR) is a well-recognized salvage procedure performed after multiple failed endoprosthetic replacements, which result in severely compromised bone stock and damaged structural integrity. TFR is performed as an alternative to lower limb amputation, restoring femoral integrity and enabling patients to resume ambulation. TFR is expected to be performed more frequently as the worldwide rate of revision arthroplasty increases due to improved patient survival rates and their underlying diseases, exceeding the functional life of endoprosthetic arthroplasty. We present a 74-year-old, overweight woman with an extensive surgical history with respect to her right knee. Her right lower extremity x-rays showed a long-cemented stem knee tumour prosthesis and a Garden 4 subcapital fracture of the ipsilateral hip. Due to multiple surgeries of the knee and femur in the past, a total femoral replacement was required to be performed. The procedure was successful, and the expected outcome was met. A successful procedure performed by a skilled and experienced surgical team, a thorough rehabilitation program, and prompt post-operative management of complications, can overcome the high incidence of infection and dislocation to preserve the limb with improved functionality and reduce pain. TFR is a drastic operative intervention that can preserve the quality of life for most patients.

Nonmechanical Revision Indications Portend Repeat Limb-Salvage Failure Following Total Femoral Replacement

BACKGROUND

There is scant evidence to guide decision-making for patients considering total femoral replacement (TFR). We aimed to identify the indication, patient, disease, and surgical technique-related factors associated with failure. We hypothesized that failure occurs more frequently in the setting of revision surgical procedures, with infection as the predominant failure mode.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving total femoral endoprostheses for oncological and revision arthroplasty indications; 166 patients met these criteria. Our primary independent variable of interest was TFR for a revision indication (arthroplasty or limb salvage); the primary outcome was failure. Analyses were performed for patient variables (age, sex, diagnosis group, indication), implant variables (model, decade, length, materials), and treatment variables. We analyzed TFR failures with respect to patient factors, operative technique, and time to failure. We conducted bivariate logistic regressions predicting failure and used a multivariate model containing variables showing bivariate associations with failure.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (27%) had treatment failure. Failure occurred in 24 (23%) of 105 primary TFRs and in 20 (33%) of 61 revision TFRs; the difference was not significant (p = 0.134) in bivariate analysis but was significant (p = 0.044) in multivariate analysis. The mean age at the time of TFR was 37 years in the primary group and 51 years in the revision group (p = 0.0006). Of the patients who had mechanical failure, none had reoccurrence of their original failure mode, whereas all 8 patients from the nonmechanical cohort had reoccurrence of the original failure mode; this difference was significant (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

TFR has a high failure rate and a propensity for deep infection, especially in the setting of revision indications and prior infection. All failed TFRs performed for revision indications for infection or local recurrence failed by reoccurrence of the original failure mode and resulted in amputation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Long term outcomes of total humeral replacement for oncological reconstructions: A single institution experience

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data on long-term survivorship and outcomes for total humerus replacements (THR) with only two series reporting 10-year survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A review of 769 consecutive, prospectively collected endoprosthetic reconstructions for oncological diagnoses at a single-center between 1980 and 2019 was performed. Patients with THRs were isolated and analyzed for outcomes, complications, and modes of failure.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients with 20 THR implants were identified. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 148 months (interquartile range [IQR] = 74-194) and 60 months (IQR = 17-155 months) for all patients. Two prostheses required revision for failure, both for symptomatic shoulder dislocation. There were three local recurrences. Revision-free survival at 5, 10, and 15 years was 100%, 86% and 86%, respectively. There were no cases of ulnar component failure, radial nerve palsy, or periprosthetic infection.

CONCLUSIONS

THR prosthesis survivorship is comparable to the previous series, with a longer follow-up than has previously been reported. Symptomatic shoulder instability was common (25%), and was the only cause of revision. Reverse total shoulder could be an important way to address this in the future. Local recurrence rates were high, as has been reported elsewhere for THR.

Does a Competing Risk Analysis Show Differences in the Cumulative Incidence of Revision Surgery Between Patients with Oncologic and Non-oncologic Conditions After Distal Femur Replacement?

BACKGROUND

Distal femur replacement is frequently used for limb salvage after bone tumor resections. It is also used in patients with severe bone loss because of traumatic conditions or revision TKA. Some studies on distal femur replacement reported on revision-free survival without distinguishing between patients with oncologic diagnoses and those without, although these patients might be incomparable because of their differences in important patient- and disease-specific characteristics. This may lead to an inaccurate and undifferentiated interpretation of the results of survival analyses.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the overall cumulative incidence of revision surgery after cemented and cementless distal femoral replacement, as determined with a competing risk analysis? (2) Does the cumulative incidence of revision surgery change over time? (3) Are there differences in the cumulative incidence of revision surgery between patients with oncologic conditions and those without who are treated with cemented or cementless distal femoral replacement?

METHODS

A total of 403 patients were possible candidates for distal femoral replacement. Of these, 56 patients elected to undergo different procedures, 83 were excluded because an expendable growing prosthesis was implanted, and 28 were lost to follow-up. Therefore, 229 patients who underwent distal femoral replacement for oncologic or non-oncologic reasons between 1983 and 2016 were retrospectively included in this study. The type of fixation method (cemented or cementless) was obtained from the patients' medical records, operation reports, and radiographic analyses from plain radiographs. All radiographs were standardized and obtained at standard time intervals in our institution. No algorithm regarding the fixation approach was followed. According to our data, patients receiving cementless fixation were younger and therefore likely to be more active than those receiving cemented fixation. The median follow-up duration of the overall cohort was 85 months (range 0.1-391 months). Patients who died or had revision surgery before the 2-year minimum follow-up interval were adequately considered using competing risk calculation. The reasons for revision surgery were classified using the classification system proposed by the International Society for Limb Salvage. A competing risk analysis was performed to estimate the cumulative incidence function of revision, accounting for death as a competing event. To evaluate the influence of potential prognostic factors, including diagnosis (oncologic versus non-oncologic), fixation (cemented versus cementless), year of distal femoral replacement, age, and sex on the occurrence of revision surgery, univariate and multivariable Fine and Gray models were applied.

RESULTS

The competing risks analysis revealed cumulative incidences of revision surgery for any cause (Types 1 to 5) of 26% (95% CI, 20.3%-31.9%) at 12 months, 37.9% (95% CI, 31.3%-44.4%) at 24 months, 52.6% (95% CI, 45.1%-59.5%) at 5 years, and 58.2% (95% CI, 50.1%-65.4%) at 10 years for all patients. Rotating hinge-type prostheses showed a lower cumulative incidence of revision surgery (41.6%; 95% CI, 31.8%-51%) than fixed-hinge prostheses did (64%; 95% CI, 50.5%-74.5% ) at 5 years (Gray's test: p = 0.01). According to the multivariate Fine and Gray model, the year of surgery did not have any effect on the risk of revision surgery (1994 to 2003: hazard ratio 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.07); 2004 to 2016: HR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.52-1.34; p = 0.26). The multivariate analysis, adjusted for disease, sex, age, cementation, and year of surgery, revealed a difference in the risk of revision surgery between patients with oncologic disease and those with non-oncologic disease (HR 0.44 for oncologic versus non-oncologic; 95% CI, 0.22-0.87; p = 0.02) and a reduction in the risk of overall revision with cemented fixation in patients with oncologic disease (HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.29-0.98; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that even with newer implants, there was a high incidence of revision surgery after distal femoral replacement. According to our analysis, patients with oncologic diagnoses have a lower likelihood of revision when the stem is cemented whereas the type of fixation did not impact patients with non-oncologic diagnoses. Because of differences in patient demographics (age, etiology of disease, and use of chemotherapy) and outcomes of fixation, oncologic and non-oncologic patients should be analyzed separately in survival studies about distal femoral replacement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Use Of Microwave Thermal Ablation In Management Of Skip Metastases In Extremity Osteosarcomas

Background

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficiency and safety of microwave thermal ablation in the treatment of skip metastases in extremity osteosarcomas. Osteosarcoma of extremities with skip metastases has a poor prognosis, and thus, microwave thermal ablation presents an attractive minimally invasive option in this patient group.

Methods

A retrospective review included a cohort of 76 patients with extremity osteosarcoma in one institute, of which five cases (6.6%) showed skip metastases. Skip lesions located in proximal femur and primary sites were distal femur in all five patients. The authors treated skip lesions using microwave thermal ablation after primary tumors were removed at wide margins. Procedural efficacy and safety were determined with postoperative MSTS score and follow-ups of 12–62 months (median 22 months).

Results

The ablation time was five to nine minutes (mean seven minutes). Taking advantage of Microwave-induced hyperthermia, wide resections of distal femur and endoprosthesis reconstructions were performed instead of total femoral resection and replacement in four patients, and above-knee amputation was performed instead of hip disarticulation in one patient. The postoperative hip functions were intact and the mean lower extremity MSTS score was 26. Three patients died at 12–22 months after definitive surgery because of pulmonary metastases, and two patients remained disease-free at 44 and 62 months after surgery, respectively. No local recurrence either at sites of primary tumors or skip lesions was found at time of the latest follow up.

Conclusion

Microwave thermal ablation is efficacious in treating skip metastases of osteosarcoma in extremities. The modality has promise for good local control of tumors, less invasive surgeries, and intact and satisfied lower extremity functions in these relatively poor prognosis patients.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic Level III.

Total femur prosthesis in oncological and not oncological series. Survival and failures

Total femur prosthesis (TFP) can be used in both oncological and prosthetic revision surgery. A retrospective analysis of 32 patients receiving a TFP at a single Center between 2002 and 2018 was performed. The average follow-up was 60 months. Revision implant free survival (RIFS) of the implants was 87% at 5 and 10 years and 72% at 15 years. Overall implant survival (OIS) of the prosthesis was 90% at 5, 10 and 15 years. Complications observed: two soft tissue failures, two infection failure and one tumor progression failure.

High complication and revision rates after total femoral replacement: a retrospective single center analysis of indication, function, and complication

INTRODUCTION

Total femoral replacement (TFR) is a limb salvage procedure performed for large bony defects. However, it is often associated with major complications and reduced function. Data on limb preservation rates and functional outcomes after TFR are limited. The primary objective of this study is to assess indications, functional outcomes, and complications after TFR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients after TFR between 2006 and 2016. All patients received a modular mega endoprosthesis (MUTARS^®). Patients were grouped according to their initial indication for TFR: (1) fracture, (2) tumor, or (3) infection. We evaluated (i) patient survival, (ii) postoperative function with the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS), knee strength, range of motion, and (iii) complications.

RESULTS

Between 2006 and 2016, TFR was performed in 22 patients with a mean age of 64 +/-17 years. Indications for TFR were tumor (n = 6), infection (n = 8) and fracture (n = 8). The mean follow-up (f/up) was 18 months. At final follow-up, mean MSTS was 24%. Mean knee flexion strength was reduced 63% compared to the contralateral leg (p = 0.004). At time of final f/up, 5 patients (22%) died, 5 (22%) underwent secondary hip exarticulation, and 12 (54%) suffered a major complication. At f/up, 11 patients had infections. Of these 11 patients, 5 died, 4 were treated with debridement, and 5 were treated with hip exarticulation. Fifteen patients survived with preserved limbs at f/up.

CONCLUSION

TFR is a salvage procedure with limited functional outcome and high complication rates. Nevertheless, the majority of our cohort could be treated successfully with limb salvage.

Mechanisms of failure and survival of total femoral endoprosthetic replacements

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prosthesis characteristics and associated conditions that may modify the survival of total femoral endoprosthetic replacements (TFEPR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 81 patients treated with TFEPR from 1976 to 2017 were retrospectively evaluated and failures were categorized according to the Henderson classification. There were 38 female patients (47%) and 43 male patients (53%) with a mean age at diagnosis of 43 years (12 to 86). The mean follow-up time was 10.3 years (0 to 31.7). A survival analysis was performed followed by univariate and multivariate Cox regression to identify independent implant survival factors.

RESULTS

The revision-free survival of the implant was 71% at five years and 63.3% at ten years. Three prostheses reached 15 years without revision. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score in the group was 26 (23 to 28). The mechanisms of failure were infection in 18%, structural failures in 6%, tumour progression in 5%, aseptic loosening in 2%, and soft-tissue failures in 1%. Prostheses used for primary reconstruction after oncological resections had lower infection rates than revision implants (8% vs 25%; p = 0.001). The rates of infection in silver-coated and non-silver-coated prosthesis were similar (17.4% vs 19.%; p = 0.869). The incidence of hip dislocation was 10%. Rotating hinge prosthesis had a lower failure rate than fixed hinge prosthesis (5.3% vs 11%). After Cox regression, the independent factors associated with failures were the history of previous operations (hazard ratio (HR) 3.7; p = 0.041), and the associated arthroplasty of the proximal tibia (HR 3.8; p = 0.034). At last follow-up, 11 patients (13%) required amputation.

CONCLUSION

TFEPR offers a reliable reconstruction option for massive bone loss of the femur, with a good survival when the prosthesis is used as a primary implant. The use of a rotating hinge at the knee and dual mobility bearing at the hip may be adequate to reduce the risk of mechanical and soft-tissue failures. Infection remains the main concern and there is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of silver-coated endoprosthesis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:522-528.

Long-term results of the Global Modular Replacement System tumor prosthesis for reconstruction after limb-sparing bone resections in orthopedic oncologic conditions: Results from a national cohort

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We investigated implant revision, implant failure, and amputation risk after limb-sparing bone tumor surgery using the Global Modular Replacement System (GMRS) tumor prosthesis in patients suffering from bone sarcomas (BS), giant cell tumors (GCT), or metastatic bone disease (MBD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study of a nationwide consecutive cohort (n = 119, 47 [12-81] years, M/F = 65/54) having limb-sparing surgery and reconstruction using the GMRS tumor prosthesis due to bone tumors (BS/GCT/MBD = 70/8/41) from 2005 to 2013. Anatomical locations were as followed: distal femur (n = 49), proximal femur (n = 41), proximal tibia (n = 26), or total femur (n = 3). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and competing risk analysis with death as a competing risk were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

For BS and GCT patients, 5-year patient survival was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59-85%) and for MBD 33% (95% CI: 19-48%). Thirty-two patients underwent revision surgery (5-year revision incidence 14%; 95% CI: 8-21%). Twelve patients had revision of bone-anchored parts (implant failure) with a 5-year revision incidence 6% (95% CI: 2-10%). Ten amputations were performed due to local relapse (n = 9) or recurrent infections (n = 1) with a 5-year incidence of amputation: 8% (95% CI: 3-13%).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a low risk of revision and amputation when using the GMRS tumor prosthesis for limb-sparing bone tumor.

[Total femoral replacement for treating femur malignant tumor]

Objective

To investigate the procedure and effectiveness of total femoral replacement for treating femur malignant tumor.

Methods

The clinical data of 9 patients with femoral malignant tumors who underwent total femoral replacement between July 2013 and March 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 5 males and 4 females, aged 16-75 years with an average of 44.8 years. The disease duration ranged from 2 to 6 months with an average of 3.5 months. There were 5 cases of osteosarcoma (3 cases were staged as Enneking ⅡB, 2 cases were staged as Enneking Ⅲ), 1 case of malignant fibrosarcoma (staged as Enneking ⅡB), 1 case of chondrosarcoma (staged as Enneking ⅠB), 2 cases of femoral muti-metastasis of lung cancer with pathological fracture. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score and the quality of life (QOL) score of the tumor patients were evaluated before operation and at 3 months after operation. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score and Harris hip score (HHS) were evaluated at last follow-up.

Results

Nine patients were followed up 11-58 months, with an average of 21 months. No complication such as wound infection, joint dislocation, and nerve injury occurred. One patient developed popliteal vein thrombosis, and 2 patients with osteosarcoma died of tumor progression. The VAS score and QOL score at 3 months after operation were 3.2±1.2 and 40.6±5.4 respectively, which were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones (5.9±0.8 and 22.3±4.2 respectively) ( t=11.314, P=0.000; t=-7.794, P=0.000). At last follow-up, the MSTS score was 15-29 with an average of 21.1, and the HHS score was 44-90 with an average of 66.5.

Conclusion

Total femoral replacement is an effective limb salvage procedure for the treatment of femoral malignant tumors, which can effectively restore the weight-bearing and walking function, relieve pain, and improve the quality of life.

Comparison of minimally invasive and non-invasive systems in lengthening total femoral prostheses

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe, analyze, and compare the survival, functional outcome, and complications of minimally invasive (MI) and non-invasive (NI) lengthening total femoral prostheses.

Patients and Methods

A total of 24 lengthening total femoral prostheses, 11 MI and 13 NI, were implanted between 1991 and 2016. The characteristics, complications, and functional results were recorded. There were ten female patients and ten male patients. Their mean age at the time of surgery was 11 years (2 to 41). The mean follow-up was 13.2 years (seven months to 29.25 years). A survival analysis was performed, and the failures were classified according to the Modified Henderson System.

Results

The overall implant survival was 79% at five, ten, and 20 years for MI prostheses, and 84% at five years and 70% at ten years for NI prostheses. At the final follow-up, 13 prostheses did not require further surgery. The overall complication rate was 46%. The mean revision-free implant survival for MI and NI prostheses was 59 months and 49 months, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the overall implant survival, revision-free survival, or the distribution of complications between the two types of prosthesis. Infection rates were also comparable in the groups (9% vs 7%; p = 0.902). The rate of leg-length discrepancy was 54% in MI prostheses and 23% in NI prostheses. In those with a MI prosthesis, there was a smaller mean range of movement of the knee (0° to 62° vs 0° to 83°; p = 0.047), the flexion contracture took a longer mean time to resolve after lengthening (3.3 months vs 1.07 months; p < 0.001) and there was a lower mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score (24.7 vs 27; p = 0.295).

Conclusion

The survival and complications of MI and NI lengthening total femoral prostheses are comparable. However, patients with NI prosthesis have more accurate correction of leg-length discrepancy, a better range of movement of the knee and an improved overall function.

[Advances in total femur replacement]

Objective

To summarize the advances of total femur replacement in recent years.

Methods

The literature related to total femur replacement was reviewed, and the indications, techniques, prosthesis design, complications, rehabilitation, and function were summarized.

Results

The indication of total femur replacement is a wide involvement of the femur, skip lesions and a huge bone defect in revision. Watson-Jone is the main incision in the proximal, and then the full length of the thigh to the patella. Vascular and nerve bundle, abduction muscles are well protected, and combined or costumed prosthesis are replaced. The prosthesis design progresses, showing a diversified prostheses. Complication is frequent and varied. Rehabilitation in early stage is physical therapy, weight training is evolutionary. The main function evaluation system is Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score.

Conclusion

Total femur replacement is effective in limb salvage. Large sample size and long-term follow-up study should be carried out to unify indications and functional exercise standards and reduce postoperative complications.

Is Total Femur Replacement a Reliable Treatment Option for Patients With Metastatic Carcinoma of the Femur?

BACKGROUND

The majority of metastatic bone lesions to the femoral bone can be treated without surgery or with minimally invasive intramedullary nailing. In rare patients with extensive metastatic disease to the femur, total femur replacement may be the only surgical alternative to amputation; however, little is known about this approach.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In a highly selected small group of patients with metastatic carcinoma of the femur, we asked: (1) What was the patient survivorship after this treatment? (2) What was the implant survivorship free from all-cause revision and amputation, and what complications were associated with this treatment? (3) What functional outcomes were achieved by patients after total femur replacement for this indication?

METHODS

Eleven patients (three men, eight women) with a mean age of 64 years (range, 41-78 years) received total femur replacements between 1986 and 2016; none were lost to followup. The most common primary disease was breast cancer. In general, during this period, our indications for this procedure were extensive metastatic disease precluding internal fixation or isolated proximal or distal femur replacement, and an anticipated lifespan exceeding 6 months. Our contraindication for this procedure during this time was expected lifespan less than 6 months. Patient survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis; implant survival free from revision surgery and amputation were assessed by competing risk analysis. Function was determined preoperatively and 6 to 12 weeks postoperatively with the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score normalized to a 100-point scale, with higher scores representing better function from a longitudinally maintained institutional database.

RESULTS

Eleven patients died at a median of 5 months (range, 1-31 months) after surgery. One-year revision-free and limb survival were 82% (95% CI, 51%-98%) and 91% (95% CI, 61%-99%), respectively. Reasons for reoperation were hip dislocation, infection and local recurrence in one patient each. The latter two complications resulted in amputation in two patients. The median MSTS score was 32 (range, 13-57).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite attempts to select patients who might have anticipated greater life expectancy, eight of 11 patients died by 6 months after surgery, and an additional two patients had undergone an amputation at 8 and at 17 months postoperatively. Most patients undergoing total femur replacement in this series did not recover from the procedure by the time they died, despite our best attempts to perform the procedure in patients whom we thought would live at least 6 months. Based on this, we believe that most patients with extensive metastatic disease to the femur should be offered palliative care, rather than major reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Use of an Artificial Ligament Decreases Hip Dislocation and Improves Limb Function After Total Femoral Prosthetic Replacement Following Femoral Tumor Resection

BACKGROUND

Hip dislocation is a major complication of total femoral prosthetic reconstruction (TFR) after femoral tumor resection. Hip dislocation can occur because of inadequate functional abductor musculature, inadequate hip capsule repair, or a long lever arm after total femur replacement. To eliminate the negative effects of these factors on the risk of hip dislocation, the use of artificial ligaments may help to increase the stability of the hip joint. We aimed to determine whether application of an artificial ligament would improve limb function and active range of movement (ROM) after TFR.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients who underwent femoral tumor resection and TFR were included. A band-shaped artificial ligament was wrapped spirally around the proximal site of the total femur prosthesis for periacetabular soft tissue reconstruction in 12 patients. The other 46 patients did not consent to receiving the artificial ligament. Complications including hip dislocation and infection, limb function, and active hip ROM were compared between patients who did and did not receive the artificial ligament.

RESULTS

The hip dislocation rate was lower in the patients who received the artificial ligament. The risk of deep infection did not differ between groups. The group that received the ligament also achieved better limb function and active ROM on flexion and abduction.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with total femur resection and endoprosthetic replacement with an artificial ligament for periacetabular soft tissue reconstruction had a more stable hip joint, better limb function, and greater active hip ROM than did patients who did not receive an artificial ligament.

Is total femoral replacement for non-oncologic and oncologic indications a safe procedure in limb preservation surgery? A single center experience of 22 cases

Background

Several surgical options for the reconstruction of massive bone defects have been described and include biologic methods with autografts and allografts, and the use of tumor endoprostheses (total femoral replacement, TFR). Several types of modular TFR are available, but nevertheless unpredictable outcomes and high complication rates have been described from most authors. The present study aims to compare results after TFR performed with modular total femur prosthesis MML (Fa. ESKA/Orthodynamics) in patients with and without malignant disease.

Methods

Retrospective chart review and functional investigation (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, Harris Hip Score (HHS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), SF-12 Health Survey, and failure classification according to Henderson) of TFR cases from 1995 to 2011. Indications for TFR were malignant tumor resection from the femur (n = 9, Group A) or failure of a revision arthroplasty without history of malignant disease (n = 13, Group B).

Results

Thirty-six patients were treated during the study period, of whom 22 could be investigated clinically after a mean follow-up of 63 months. Overall failure rate for TFR was 59.1%, leading to 38 surgical revisions. The most common failure mechanisms were Type I (soft tissue), followed by Type IV (infection) and Type III (mechanical failure). Mean MSTS score out of 30 was 13 (range 1–25), with significantly higher scores in Group A (mean 19, range 3–25) than Group B (mean 9, range 1–15).

Conclusion

TFR is an established procedure to restore femoral integrity. However, complication rates are considerably high, and depend mainly on the age at initial reconstruction.

Megaprosthesis versus Allograft Prosthesis Composite for massive skeletal defects

Massive skeletal defects are encountered in the setting of tumors necessitating excision, failed total hip arthroplasty with periprosthetic bone loss, periprosthetic fracture, complex trauma, multiple failed osteosynthesis and infection. Reconstruction of the segmental defects poses a tremendous challenge to the orthopaedic surgeons. The goal of osseous reconstruction of these defects is to restore the bone length and function. Currently the most commonly employed methods for reconstruction are either a megaprosthesis or an Allograft Prosthesis Composite (APC). Megaprosthesis, initially created for the treatment in neoplastic pathologies are being used for the non-neoplastic pathologies as well. The longevity of these implants is an issue as majority of the patients receiving them are the survivors of oncologic issue or elderly population, both in which the life expectancy is limited. However, the early complications like instability, infection, prosthetic breakage and fixation failure have been extensively reported in several literatures. Moreover, the megaprostheses are non-biological options preventing secure fixation of the soft tissue around the implant. The Allograft Prosthesis Composites were introduced to overcome the complications of megaprosthesis. APC is made of a revision-type prosthesis cemented into the skeletal allograft to which the remaining soft tissue sleeve can be biologically fixed. APCs are preferred in young and low risk patients. Though the incidence of instability is relatively low with the composites as compared to the megaprosthesis, apart from infection, the newer complications pertaining to APCs are inevitable that includes non-union, allograft resorption, periprosthetic fracture and potential risk of disease transmission. The current review aims to give an overview on the treatment outcomes, complications and survival of both the megaprostheses and APCs at different anatomic sites in both the upper and lower limbs.

Megaprosthesis of the knee in tumor and revision surgery

The introduction of multidisciplinary approach with chemo and radiotherapy, the advances in surgical and the improvements of diagnostic techniques allowed limb salvage surgery in most cases of bone sarcomas instead of amputation. Modular megaprostheses are the most common method of reconstruction after segmental resection of the long bones in the extremities for their availability, immediate fixation, early weight bearing, good function. Despite the advances in materials and implant designs, these systems have an high incidence of complications. Aim of this study was to report the experience on mega-prostheses implanted around the knee in tumor and revision surgery to analyze: the most frequent used current systems, the problems of stems fixation, extensor mechanism reconstructions in proximal tibia resections and the preservation of growth of the lower extremity in children.

Megaprosthesis of the knee in tumor and revision surgery

The introduction of multidisciplinary approach with chemo and radiotherapy, the advances in surgical and the improvements of diagnostic techniques allowed limb salvage surgery in most cases of bone sarcomas instead of amputation. Modular megaprostheses are the most common method of reconstruction after segmental resection of the long bones in the extremities for their availability, immediate fixation, early weight bearing, good function. Despite the advances in materials and implant designs, these systems have an high incidence of complications. Aim of this study was to report the experience on mega-prostheses implanted around the knee in tumor and revision surgery to analyze: the most frequent used current systems, the problems of stems fixation, extensor mechanism reconstructions in proximal tibia resections and the preservation of growth of the lower extremity in children. (www.actabiomedica.it)

The push-through total femoral prosthesis offers a functional alternative to total femoral replacement: a case series

PURPOSE

Oncologic resections or complications of segmental femoral prostheses can result in severe bone loss of the femur for which a total femoral prosthesis (TFP) is required. This study assesses whether the loss of stability and function caused by the loss of muscle attachments can be improved by using a push-through total femoral endoprosthesis (PTTF), because it saves parts of the femur and its muscle attachments.

METHODS

In this retrospective case series, ten patients aged 25-77 (mean 54) who received a PTTF between 2005 and 2014 were included for baseline, complications and survival analysis with a mean follow-up of 5.3 (1.1-9.6) years. Functional outcome was assessed in six patients using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, WHO performance scale, Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS), SF36, EQ-5D, NRS pain score, fatigue score and satisfaction score.

RESULTS

The mean MSTS score was 64% (23-93%). Five patients had a WHO performance scale of 1, one patient of 3. Mean TESS was 69% (13-90%). SF36 was most notably limited by physical functioning (mean 48), vitality (68) and general health (67). NRS score was 1.9, 1.8 and 8.3 for pain, fatigue and satisfaction, respectively. There were four failures: two infections (one resulting in amputation and one in a minor revision) and two mechanical failures (which required one revision to a TFP and one minor revision). Patient survival was 100%, limb survival 90%, and prosthesis survival 80%.

CONCLUSION

The push-through total femoral endoprosthesis allows preservation of muscle attachments and offers a good alternative to total femoral prostheses.

Short- to long-term follow-up of total femoral replacement in non-oncologic patients

BACKGROUND

Compromised bone stock and heavily impaired structural integrity after multiple endoprosthetic revision surgeries can lead to a comparable condition as encountered in musculoskeletal tumor surgery. Total femoral replacement (TFR) can restore femoral integrity and allow patients to resume ambulation. Even though several authors reported their results of TFR, so far many questions are still on debate: Which patients are at risk to experience low functional outcome? Do complications and clinical outcome after TFR depend on the indication for the surgery (e.g. periprosthetic fractures or aseptic loosening) or the age of the patients? The purpose of the present study was to compare complication rates after TFR performed with modular total femur prosthesis MML (Fa. ESKA/Orthodynamics) in patients without malignant disease.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review and functional investigation of patients treated with a TFR for non-oncologic conditions from 1995 to 2015 and a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Complications were recorded according to the Henderson-Classification; outcome was evaluated with established clinical scores. The indication for TFR was periprosthetic fracture (Group A, n = 11) or aseptic loosening (Group B, n = 7) with massive bone defect of the femur deemed unsuitable for conventional arthroplastic or biologic reconstruction.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients matched the inclusion criteria and could be investigated clinically after a mean follow-up of 80 months (range: 28-132). Before TFA, all patients had previously undergone multiple operations (range: 1-8). The overall failure rate for any reason was 72% (n = 13/18), leading to a total of 37 surgical revisions with total exchange of TFR in 22% (n = 4/18). Most common failure mechanism was Type I (soft tissue), followed by Type IV (infection) and Type III (mechanical failure). According to Enneking's functional evaluation method (MSTS-Score), the function ranged from 1 to 15 with a mean of 10 ± 4 out of 30.

CONCLUSION

TFR is a salvage procedure to restore mechanical integrity and regain functional ability after extensive femoral bone loss. Outcome of the patients in the present study did mainly depend on the age at reconstruction and not on the indication for TFR.

The Significance of Rectus Femoris for the Favorable Functional Outcome After Total Femur Replacement

Background:

In treatment of tumors, we usually reconstruct after resection of the entire femur using only metallic modular endoprostheses among many procedures and defined it as a total femur replacement. We studied the interrelation between the preservation of rectus femoris and the functional outcome after total femur replacement.

Methods:

We rated the functional outcomes of 21 patients who underwent total femur replacement. We categorized the subjects into 2 groups: group A (rectus femoris preserved) and group B (rectus femoris unpreserved). We examined them based on the Mann-Whitney U test between the 2 groups in average through the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional scores.

Results:

The average score of group A was 20 of 25 (11–25; 80%), whereas the average score of group B was 10 of 25 (4–13; 40%). There was significant difference between the groups (P = 0.00168877).

Conclusion:

We found that the preservation of rectus femoris is imperative for achieving the favorable functional outcome in total femur replacement.

Periprosthetic joint infections in modular endoprostheses of the lower extremities: a retrospective observational study in 101 patients

Background

Modular mega-endoprosthesis systems are used to bridge very large bone defects and have become a widespread method in orthopaedic surgery for the treatment of tumours and revision arthroplasty. However, the indications for the use of modular mega-endoprostheses must be carefully considered. Implanting modular endoprostheses requires major, complication-prone surgery in which the limited salvage procedures should always be borne in mind. The management of periprosthetic infection is particularly difficult and beset with problems.

Given this, the present study was designed to gauge the significance of periprosthetic infections in connection with modular mega-implants in the lower extremities among our own patients.

Methods

Patients who had been fitted with modular endoprosthesis on a lower extremity at our department between September 1994 and December 2011 were examined retrospectively. A total of 101 patients with 114 modular prostheses were identified. Comprising 30 men (29.7 %) and 71 women (70.3 %), their average age at the time of surgery was 67 years (18–92 years).

Results

The average follow-up period was 27 months (5 months and 2 weeks to 14 years and 11 months) and the drop-out rate was about 8.8 %. Altogether, there were 19 (17.7 %) endoprosthesis infections: 3 early infections and 16 late or delayed infections. The pathogen spectrum was dominated by coagulase-negative staphylococci (36 %) and Staphylococcus aureus (16 %), including 26 % multi-resistant pathogens. Reinfection occurred in 37 % of cases of infection. Tumours were followed by significantly fewer infections than the other indications. Infections were twice as likely to occur after previous surgery.

Conclusion

In our findings modular endoprostheses (18 %) are much more susceptible to infection than primary endoprostheses (0.5–2,5 %). Infection is the most common complication alongside the dislocation of proximal femur endoprostheses. Consistent, radical surgery is essential – although even with an adequate treatment strategy, the recurrence rate is very high. Unfortunately, the functional results are frequently unsatisfactory, with amputation often being the last resort. Therefore, the indication for implantation must be carefully considered and discussed in great detail, especially in the case of multimorbid patients with previous joint infections.

Total femoral allograft with simultaneous revision total hip and knee arthroplasty: 18 year follow-up

Massive allograft can be a useful option in revision total joint arthroplasty for treatment of significant bone loss. In rare cases, revision hip and knee arthroplasty procedures can be performed simultaneously using massive allograft-prosthetic composites. We present an 18 year follow up of a patient who received a simultaneous revision hip and knee total femoral allograft and discuss recent literature as it relates to this case.

Total Femur Replacement After Tumor Resection: Limb Salvage Usually Achieved But Complications and Failures are Common

BACKGROUND

Primary bone or soft tissue tumors of the femur sometimes present with severe and extensive bone destruction, leaving few limb-salvage options other than total femur replacement. However, there are few data available regarding total femur replacement and, in particular, regarding implant failures.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) What are the revision-free and overall implant survival rates of conventional total femur replacements in patients treated for sarcoma of the femur or soft tissues? (2) What are the revision-free and overall implant survival rates of expandable total femur replacements in skeletally immature patients? (3) Using the comprehensive International Society of Limb Salvage failure-mode classification, what types of complications occur with conventional and expandable total femur replacements?

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Our retrospective, single-center cohort study was based on data prospectively collected for 50 patients who received a total femur replacement after tumor resection for indications other than carcinoma or metastatic disease. Of the 50 patients, six (12%) were lost to followup before 6 months. Ten of the remaining 44 patients received expandable implants. The mean followup was 57 months (range, 1-280 months) and 172 months (range, 43-289 months) for patients who underwent conventional and expandable total femur replacements, respectively. For implant survival, competing risk analyses were used.

RESULTS

At 5 years, revision-free implant survival of conventional total femur replacements was 48% (95% CI, 0.37-0.73), and overall implant survival was 97% (95% CI, 0.004-0.20). Five-year revision-free implant survival of expandable total femur replacements was 30% (95% CI, 0.47-1.00) and overall implant survival was 100%. With conventional total femur replacements soft tissue failures occurred in 13 of 34 patients, structural failures in three, infection in six, and local tumor progression in one. No patient had aseptic loosening with conventional total femur replacements, but hip disarticulation occurred in two patients owing to extensive wound-healing problems and infection. With expandable total femur replacements soft tissue failure, aseptic loosening, and infection occurred in one patient each of 10, and structural failures in three of 10 (two periprosthetic fractures, one loosening of an enhanced tendon anchor). No hip disarticulations were performed. Additionally expandable total femur replacement-related failures included hip instability in eight of 10 patients, contractures attributable to massive scar tissue in six, and defect of the implant's expansion mechanism in four patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the indications for total femoral resection are rare, we think that total femur replacement is a reasonable treatment option for reconstruction of massive femoral bone defects after tumor resection in adults and skeletally immature patients, and results in limb salvage in most patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Survival of modern knee tumor megaprostheses: failures, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis

BACKGROUND

Modular megaprostheses are now the most common method of reconstruction after segmental resection of the long bones in the lower extremities. Previous studies reported variable outcome and failure rates after knee megaprosthetic reconstructions.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The objectives of this study were to analyze the results of a modular tumor prosthesis after resection of bone tumor around the knee with respect to (1) survivorship; (2) failure rate; (3) comparative survivorship against different sites of reconstructions and of primary and revision implants; and (4) functional results on the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system.

METHODS

Between 2003 and 2010, 247 rotating-hinge Global Modular Reconstruction System (GMRS) knee prostheses were implanted in our institute for malignant and aggressive benign tumors. During this time, that group represented 23% of the patients who had oncologic megaprosthesis reconstruction about the knee after resection of primary or metastatic bone tumors (247 of 1086 patients). In the other 77% of cases we used other types of oncologic prostheses. Before 2003 we used the older Howmedica Modular Resection System and Kotz Modular Femur/Tibia Replacement from 2003 we used mostly the GMRS but we continued to use the HMRS in some cases such as patients with poor prognoses, elderly patients, or metastatic patients. Sites included 187 distal femurs and 60 proximal tibias. Causes of megaprosthesis failure were classified according to Henderson et al. in five types: Type 1 (soft tissue failure), Type 2 (aseptic loosening), Type 3 (structural failure), Type 4 (infection), and Type 5 (tumor progression). Followup was at a minimum oncologic followup of 2 years (mean, 4 years; range, 2-8 years). Kaplan-Meier actuarial curves of implant survival to major failures were done. Functional results were analyzed according to the MSTS II system; 223 of the 247 were available for functional scoring (81%).

RESULTS

At latest followup, among 175 treated patients for primary reconstruction, 117 are continuously disease-free, 26 have no evidence of disease after treatment of relapse, eight are alive with disease, and 24 died from disease. The overall failure rate of the megaprostheses in our series was 29.1% (72 of 247). Type 1 failure occurred in 8.5% (21 of 247) cases, Type 2 in 5.6% (14 of 247), Type 3 in 0%, Type 4 in 9.3% (23 of 247), and Type 5 in 5.6% (14 of 247). Kaplan-Meier curve showed an overall implant survival rate for all types of failures of 70% at 4 years and 58% at 8 years. Prosthetic survivorship for revisions was 80% at 5 years and for primary reconstructions was 60% at 5 years (p = 0.013). Survivorship to infection was 95% at 5 years for revision patients and 84% at 5 years for primary patients (p = 0.475). The mean MSTS score was 84 (25.2; range, 8-30) with no difference between sites of localization (24.7 in proximal tibia versus 25.4 in distal femur reconstruction; p = 0.306).

CONCLUSIONS

Results at a minimum of 2 years with this modular prosthesis are satisfactory in terms of survivorship (both oncologic and reconstructive) and causes and rates of failure. Although these results seem comparable with other like implants, we will continue to follow this cohort, and we believe that comparative trials among the available megaprosthesis designs are called for.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Multilevel en bloc spondylectomy for tumors of the thoracic and lumbar spine is challenging but rewarding

BACKGROUND

Over the years, en bloc spondylectomy has proven its efficacy in controlling spinal tumors and improving survival rates. However, there are few reports of large series that critically evaluate the results of multilevel en bloc spondylectomies for spinal neoplasms.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Using data from a large spine tumor center, we answered the following questions: (1) Does multilevel total en bloc spondylectomy result in acceptable function, survival rates, and local control in spinal neoplasms? (2) Is reconstruction after this procedure feasible? (3) What complications are associated with this procedure? (4) is it possible to achieve adequate surgical margins with this procedure?

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 38 patients undergoing multilevel total en bloc spondylectomy by a single surgeon (AL) from 1994 to 2011. Indications for this procedure were primary spinal sarcomas, solitary metastases, and aggressive primary benign tumors involving multiple segments of the thoracic or lumbar spine. Patients had to be medically fit and have no visceral metastases. Analysis was by chart and radiographic review. Margin quality was classified into intralesional, marginal, and wide. Radiographs, MR images, and CT scans were studied for local recurrence. Graft healing and instrumentation failures at subsequent followup were assessed. Complications were divided into major or minor and further classified as intraoperative and early and late postoperative. We evaluated the oncologic status using cumulative disease-specific and metastases-free survival analysis. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 39 months; range, 24-124 months).

RESULTS

Of the 38 patients, 34 (89%) were alive and walking without support at final followup. Thirty-one (81%) had no evidence of disease. Two patients died postoperatively and another two died of systemic disease (without local recurrence). Only three patients (8%) had a local recurrence. There were 14 major complications and 22 minor complications in 25 patients (65%). Only one patient required revision of implants secondary to mechanical failure. Two cases of cage subsidence were noted but had no clinical significance. Wide margins were achieved in nine patients (23%), marginal in 25 (66%), and intralesional in four (11%).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with multisegmental spinal tumors, oncologic resections were achieved by multilevel en bloc spondylectomy and led to an acceptable survival rate with reasonable local control. Multilevel en bloc surgery was associated with a high complication rate; however, most patients recovered from their complications. Although the surgical procedure is challenging, our encouraging mid-term results clearly favor and validate this technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Large volume osteosarcomas of the femur treated with total femoral replacement

Patients with extensive malignancies involving the femur often require total femoral replacement when their limbs can be salvaged. Reported series are small and involve heterogeneity of tumours. We present nine patients with osteosarcomas of the femur treated at our institution between 2003 and 2010 with a mean follow-up of 27 (6 to 56) months. Their ages ranged from 9 to 17 (mean 14 years). They had large volume tumours (mean 911 cm3) and presented late with a mean of 5.5 months from the onset of symptoms to definitive treatment. All patients underwent resection and total femur replacement. Six patients have died and two are alive with good function at the time of this report. One was lost to follow-up. These patients require a high level of treatment care and have a guarded prognosis.

The use of megaprostheses for reconstruction of large skeletal defects in the extremities: a critical review

In the case of primary malignant tumors, extensive metastatic disease, major trauma or end-stage revision arthroplasty, the orthopaedic surgeon often has to deal with the need to reconstruct large skeletal defects, or replace bone of low quality. In the past years this was frequently impossible, and the only solution was amputation of the extremity. Later, the introduction of custom-made endoprostheses capable of reconstructing large skeletal defects, also known as megaprostheses, allowed for sparing of the extremity. This was especially valuable in the case of oncologic orthopaedic surgery, as advances in the medical treatment of sarcoma patients improved prognosis and limb-preserving surgery proved to have comparable patient survival rates to amputation. However, custom-made designs were implicated in frequent mechanical failures. Furthermore, they were extremely difficult to revise.

The introduction of modular endoprostheses in the 1980s marked a new era in orthopaedic oncologic surgery. Modular megaprostheses consist of a number of different components in readily available sets, which can be assembled in various combinations to best address the specific bone defect. Moreover, they proved to have considerably lower rate of mechanical failures, which were also much easier to address during revision surgery by replacing only the parts that failed. The functional outcome after reconstruction with megasprostheses is often very satisfactory and the patient can enjoy a good quality of life. Nowadays, the major challenge is to eliminate the rate of non-mechanical complications associated with surgery of that magnitude, namely the risk for wound dehiscence and necrosis, deep infection, as well as local recurrence of the tumor.

In our present mini-review, we attempt to make a critical approach of the available literature, focusing on the multiple aspects of reconstructive surgery using megaprostheses. We present the evolution of megasprosthetic implants, the indications for their use, and describe the outcome of surgery, so that the non-specialized orthopedic surgeon also becomes familiar with that kind of surgery which is usually performed in tertiary centers. A special interest lays in the recent developments that promise for even better results and fewer complications.

Short-stem reconstruction for megaendoprostheses in case of an ultrashort proximal femur

Background

Tumors of the distal femur and diaphysis with proximal metaphyseal extension into the femur present a challenge for limb salvage. The conventional treatment consists of limb salvage with total femur replacement. This case study aims to present preliminary results and experience with short-stem reconstruction, focusing on the mechanical stability of the procedure.

Methods

Sixteen short stems were implanted in 15 patients. The patients’ mean age was 33,3 years (range 11–73). In 10 patients, the stem was used for distal femur reconstruction, in one patient for diaphyseal reconstruction, and in four for a stump lengthening procedure. All of the patients had a primary sarcoma in their history. The mean follow-up period was 37 months (range 5–95 months). The clinical and functional follow-up data were analyzed.

Results

Ten patients (67%) were still alive at the time of evaluation. Three complications associated with the stem were noted. In one case, there was aseptic loosening after 58 months; in another, aseptic loosening occurred because the diameter of the stem had initially been too small; and in one case, there was breakage of the fixation screw, without any clinical symptoms. The average Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score for all patients was 23 (range 9–28). The mean result for the distal femur replacement was 24 (range 22–28). None of the surviving patients with distal femur replacements needed any crutches or had a Trendelenburg limp. Both living patients who underwent a stump lengthening procedure were able to walk with an exoprosthesis.

Conclusions

The short stem is a good solution that can prevent or delay proximal femur resection in patients with tumors extending into the proximal metaphyseal femur. Additional risks of proximal femur resection, such as dislocation, opening of another oncological compartment, Trendelenburg limp, and chondrolysis can be avoided.

Proximal femoral reconstruction with a constrained acetabulum in oncologic patients

Metallic endoprostheses are used for oncological reconstruction around the proximal femur and hip joint. Common modes of failure with hemiarthroplasty or standard hip arthroplasty after proximal femoral replacement include dislocation, late hip pain, and infection. The authors reviewed hospital records to identify patients undergoing constrained tripolar hip arthroplasty for oncological reasons between 2002 and 2012. Inclusion criterion was at least 12-cm proximal femoral resection, including patients with total femur reconstruction. A total of 33 patients were reviewed. Information regarding demographics, length of follow-up, treatment characteristics, and patient outcomes was extracted. Average follow-up for all patients was 912.33 days (30.4 months). Average follow-up was 1396.1 days for living patients and 428.6 days for deceased patients. Average estimated blood loss was 462.12 cc: an average of 1080 cc for patients undergoing total femoral resection and replacement and 315.8 cc for patients undergoing proximal femoral resection and replacement. Average operative time was 137.7 minutes: an average of 205 minutes for patients undergoing total femoral resection and replacement and 119.1 minutes for patients undergoing proximal femoral resection and replacement. Average Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was 21.7. There were no dislocations in the cohort. A constrained tripolar device can be safely used for oncological proximal femoral reconstructions while minimizing the risk of dislocation. Positioning of the acetabular implant in neutral anatomic version in conjunction with a neutral-placed femoral component provides the greatest range of motion, reduction of liner impingement, and improved hip stability.

Four- and five- level en bloc spondylectomy for malignant spinal tumors

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To report results of 4- and 5-level en bloc spondylectomy (EBS) in the treatment of malignant spinal tumors.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

EBS is widely used to avoid local recurrence in the treatment of spinal malignant tumors. Four- and 5-level EBS are aggressive procedures associated with complications and morbidity.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients treated with minimum 4-level EBS. Patient and surgical data were noted. Radiographs, magnetic resonance images, and computed tomographic scans were studied for local recurrence, graft, and instrumentation failures at subsequent follow-up. Type of excision was classified into intralesional, marginal, and wide margins. Complications were divided into major or minor and were further classified as intraoperative, early, and late postoperative. At the last follow-up, the patients were classified as alive with no evidence of local or systemic disease, alive with evidence of local or systemic disease or both, dead with evidence of local disease, or systemic disease or both, and dead without evidence of local and systemic disease.

RESULTS

Nine patients were identified who required a minimum 4-level en bloc resection. Five males and 4 females. Average age was 41.66 years (11-66). There were 8 primary malignant tumors: 3 chordomas, 3 osteosarcomas, 1 chondrosarcoma, 1 primary lung tumor and 1 metastatic alveolar soft part sarcoma. Six were operated with 4-level en bloc and 3 with 5 levels. The mean surgical time was 713 minutes and estimated blood loss was 4.5 L. Mean follow-up was 27.7 months (8-84). At the last follow-up, 6 patients were alive with no evidence of local or systemic disease, 1 alive with evidence of systemic disease, 1 dead with evidence of local disease, or systemic disease or both, and 1 DNLS. Only 1 (11%) patient had a local recurrence. Three patients with Frankel D had full neurological recovery. Histopathological assessment showed marginal margins in 7 patients and wide in 2. There were 9 major and 9 minor complications in 7 patients. Five of 7 patients (71%) with complications, had fully recovered from their complications at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Multilevel EBS, can be offered to a patient to prevent local recurrence of disease. Even in experienced hands, the risks of intra- and postoperative complications are high (78%). However, most of the patients with complications, recovered completely (71%). Although the surgery itself may prove beneficial, patients should be well informed regarding the morbidity associated with it.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Functional outcome of limb salvage surgery with mega-endoprosthetic reconstruction for bone tumors

BACKGROUND

The use of a mega-endoprosthesis has become the method of choice for reconstruction after bone tumors. In this study, we sought to determine the functional outcome and complications associated with mega-endoprosthesis.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the charts of 16 patients who had undergone resection of bone tumors followed by reconstruction with mega-endoprosthesis between 2006 and 2011 was performed. Functional evaluation was based on the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system. Complications of the procedures were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Eight men and eight women at an average age of 36.7 years were included in the study. The tumor involved lower limb in 14 patients and upper limb in 2 patients. The average MSTS functional score was 72.3 ± 15. Excellent results were achieved in six patients, good in five, moderate and fair in two each and poor in one. Complications occurred in eight patients. Two patients had aseptic loosening of the femoral component of total knee replacement. Flap necrosis occurred in two patients, both of whom required latissimus dorsi free flap for coverage of total knee prosthesis. One patient underwent revision of femoral component subsequent to knee dissociation. Local recurrence of tumor, patellar tendon rupture and foot drop occurred in one patient each.

CONCLUSION

Mega-endoprosthetic reconstruction in limb salvage provides good functional outcome in patients with bone tumors.

Functional and oncologic outcomes after excision of the total femur in primary bone tumors: Results with a low cost total femur prosthesis

BACKGROUND

The extent of tumor may necessitate resection of the complete femur rarely to achieve adequate oncologic clearance in bone sarcomas. We present our experience with reconstruction in such cases using an indigenously manufactured, low-cost, total femoral prosthesis (TFP). We assessed the complications of the procedure, the oncologic and functional outcomes, and implant survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight patients (four males and four females) with a mean age of 32 years, operated between December 2003 and June 2009, had a TFP implanted. The diagnosis included osteogenic sarcoma (5), Ewing's sarcoma (1), and chondrosarcoma (2). Mean followup was 33 months (9-72 months) for all and 40 months (24-72 months) in survivors. They were evaluated by Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score, implant survival as well as patient survival.

RESULTS

There was one local recurrence and five of seven patients are currently alive at the time of last followup. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score for patients ranged from 21 to 25 with a mean of 24 (80%). The implant survival was 88% at 5 years with only one TFP needing removal because of infection.

CONCLUSIONS

A TFP in appropriately indicated patients with malignant bone tumors is oncologically safe. A locally manufactured, cost-effective implant provided consistent and predictable results after excision of the total femur with good functional outcomes.

Infected total femoral replacements: evaluation of limb loss risk factors

A complication of total femoral replacement (TFR) is periprosthetic infection. Studies have shown that infected endoprostheses have a significant amputation rate, as high as 36.7%. This study examined possible risk factors that may attribute to unsalvageable TFRs following periprosthetic infections, including age, sex, primary vs secondary TFRs, number of irrigation and debridements, recent history of periprosthetic infection, early vs late infection, use of antibiotic cement, and the number of postoperative antibiotics. In a retrospective chart review, 10 patients who had periprosthetic infections of their TFRs were identified from our orthopedic surgical database between 2000 and 2010. Seven of 10 TFRs were unsalvageable due to infection. The 2 greatest risk factors that influenced unsalvageable TFR were age older than 50 years and recipients of secondary TFRs. All 6 patients older than 50 years had unsalvageable TFRs, whereas 1 of 4 patients younger than 50 years had an unsalvageable TFR (P<.05). Similarly, all 6 patients who received secondary TFRs had unsalvageable TFRs, whereas 1 of 4 patients who received a TFR as the primary method of treatment had an unsalvageable TFR (P<.05). No other risk factors showed statistical significance or could be identified as possible risk factors. Surgeons should educate patients who fall into high-risk categories about the benefits of early intervention, such as amputation, that could prevent additional surgeries and decrease the lengths of hospitalizations.