Abstract
We reviewed our experience with diaphyseal endoprostheses to determine the survival of this type of reconstruction and factors affecting that survival.
Method: We retrospectively studied 44 patients who underwent endoprostheticreconstruction of diaphyseal bone defects after excision of primary sarcomas between 1979 and 2002 with more than 2 years follow up.
Results: There were 27 males and 17 females, the median age at diagnosis was 25 years (8–75) and the median bone defect was 18cm (10–27.6).There were 33 femoral reconstructions, 6 tibial and 5 humeral. The cumulative overall survival for all patients was 67% at 10 years and prosthetic reconstruction using revision surgery as an end point was 62% at 10 years. The cumulative risk offailure of reconstruction including; infection, fracture, aseptic loosening, local recurrence and amputation was 45% at 10 years but for amputation only was 13% at 10 years. The patient age, the type of prosthesis ;whether cemented oruncemented, site of defect (femur, tibia, and humerus) and length of defect did not influence prosthetic survival.
Conclusion: We concluded that the use endoprostheses for reconstruction of diaphyseal bone defects remains a valuable method of reconstruction with predictable results and compares favourably with other forms of reconstruction of massive diaphyseal bone defects.
The abstracts were prepared by Mr Roger Tillman. Correspondence should be addressed to BOOS at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PN
