1
|
Trikoupis IG, Mavrodontis II, Papadopoulos DV, Goumenos SD, Georgoulis DA, Gavriil P, Melissaridou D, Savvidou OD, Kontogeorgakos VA, Papagelopoulos PJ. 3D-printed glenoid implant reconstruction, after partial scapulectomy for malignant tumors: a case series. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2024; 34:1557-1562. [PMID: 38280074 PMCID: PMC10980628 DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-03839-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/28/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 01/29/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Glenoid tumors are extremely rare, and reconstruction remains very challenging. The aim of this study is to present the clinical and functional outcomes, of a new glenoid reconstruction method using 3-dimensional-printed implant. METHODS Four patients with primary glenoid tumors underwent reconstruction using 3-dimensional-printed glenoid implant linked with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and functional outcome, using MSTS and DASH score, as well as complications' rate. RESULTS Wide excision was achieved in all patients. No local recurrence or distant metastasis was diagnosed at the follow-up period. The mean MSTS score was 80.5%, and DASH score was 15.2%. According to Hendersons' classification, there were no postoperative complications. CONCLUSION The use of 3-dimensional-printed implants, can be a very reliable solution with satisfying clinical and functional outcomes for reconstruction, in patients with musculoskeletal malignancies of the glenoid. Level of evidence IV Treatment Study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ioannis G Trikoupis
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Ioannis I Mavrodontis
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios V Papadopoulos
- Second Department of Orthopedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 'Agia Olga' Hospital, Th. Konstantopoulou 3-5, Nea Ionia, 14233, Athens, Greece
| | - Stavros D Goumenos
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios A Georgoulis
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Panagiotis Gavriil
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitra Melissaridou
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Olga D Savvidou
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Vasileios A Kontogeorgakos
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece
| | - Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos
- First Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, "ATTIKON" University General Hospital, Rimini 1, Chaidari, 12462, Athens, Greece.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Strydom A, Saragas NP, Ferrao PN. The use of a 3D printed titanium implant for arthrodesis in the management of large osseous defects in the ankle. Foot Ankle Surg 2023; 29:576-583. [PMID: 37833130 DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2023.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2022] [Revised: 05/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large osseous defects (LOD) in the ankle occur because of multiple aetiologies. Advancement in 3-dimensional (3D) printing technologies has led to the use of custom implants and instrumentation their management. A 3D printed patient-specific porous titanium cage which allows for peripheral osteo-integration and autogenous bone-grafting could be an ideal implant in these cases. METHODS Retrospective review of a multi-centre, multi-surgeon consecutive cohort of patients requiring either TTC or AA for a large osseous defect between June 2019 - August 2020. A custom titanium prosthesis was 3D-printed according to CT measurements for implantation. RESULTS Mean follow up was 19.5 months (range 12-24 months). Plain radiographs and CT scans at 12 months confirmed osseointegration (stability) in 11of 13 patients (84%). Two patients developed late infection, one requiring revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS 3D-Printed titanium implants in the management of LODs in the ankle offer a comparable success rate to other reported procedures, with unlimited geometric possibilities in the design allowing for accurate length correction. Their structural stability may offer an advantage over conventional bone graft techniques and limits the amount of bone-graft required. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE LOE III.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Strydom
- Consultant Foot and Ankle Surgeon, Suite 3A, -2 Level, Westwing, Netcare Sunninghill Hospital, Cnr Nanyuki & Witkoppen Road, Sunninghill, 2157, South Africa.
| | - Nikiforos P Saragas
- The Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Unit, Suite 303 Netcare Linksfield Hospital, 24 12th Avenue, Linksfield West, 2192, Johannesburg, South Africa; Honorary Adjunct Professor and Head, Foot and Ankle Unit, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
| | - Paulo Nf Ferrao
- The Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Unit, Suite 303 Netcare Linksfield Hospital, 24 12th Avenue, Linksfield West, 2192, Johannesburg, South Africa; Foot and Ankle Unit, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Amelot A, Colman M, Loret JE. Vertebral body replacement using patient-specific three-dimensional-printed polymer implants in cervical spondylotic myelopathy: an encouraging preliminary report. Spine J 2018; 18:892-9. [PMID: 29408349 DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.01.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2017] [Revised: 01/09/2018] [Accepted: 01/19/2018] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT Resulting from recent studies that suggest a benefit of implant design on the achievement of fusion and stability in cervical spinal disease management, manufacturing development has increased over the past years. This article attempts to describe how the development of patient-specific implants, which are used during the procedures of anterior cervical corpectomy and vertebral body replacement (VBR), impacts the outcomes of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) management. MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective clinical study included six patients who were implanted with patient-specific VBR for single-level or multilevel CSM. The following clinical scores were collected: visual analog scale (VAS), modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), Neck Dysfunction Index (NDI), and European myelopathy score (EMS), along with radiological measurements. RESULTS Six patients reached a mean follow-up date of 21months (12-24). Angle measurements remained constant during follow-up, including the C2-C7 Cobb angle and the corpectomy Cobb angle. Furthermore, no deformations, such as hyperlordosis or kyphosis, were detected. The anterior height (Ha) and the posterior height (Hp) of the corpectomy segment remained constant (ratio close to 1) with no severe subsidence (>3 mm) at the last follow-up. No height differences were detected between the preoperative and the last follow-up dates, neither for the upper Hp and Ha (0.97±0.09 and 1.00±0.06, respectively) nor for the lower adjacent vertebrate Hp and Ha (0.96±0.04 and 1.02±0.12). The mean mJOA and EMS recovery rates were 60.4% (standard deviation [SD] 20.4) and 77.0% (SD 29.7), respectively, at last the follow-up. An EMS of at least 16 of 18 was observed in 83% (5 of 6) of the patients. We recorded a preoperative NDI score at 47.1% (SD 18.6) that improved to 11.2% (SD 4.1) at the last follow-up (p<.01). The preoperative VAS neck (6.3, range 4-7) and the VAS arm (6.1, range 3- 9) scores improved to 1.3 (range 0-3) and 2.8 (range 0-5), respectively, at the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS This preliminary report suggests a possible benefit of the use of patient-specific implants in CSM treatment. The favorable clinical and radiological outcomes were associated with a correct achievement rate; these are promising elements toward the development of the concept of personalized therapy. Nonetheless, these encouraging results have to be confirmed now with a longer follow-up and a larger cohort.
Collapse
|