header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

INCIDENCE OF COMPLICATIONS IN KOTZ TYPE TUMOR ENDOPROSTHESES OF THE PROXIMAL FEMUR IN TUMOR PATIENTS – A RETROSPECTIVE SINGLE CENTER STUDY IN 170 CONSECUTIVE CASES



Abstract

Background: Endoprosthetic reconstruction has become the gold standard of treatment after the resection of tumors around the proximal femur, however, the rate of complications linked to megaprostheses is clearly higher than with standard implants. Aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and type of complications related to modular proximal femur prostheses.

Patients and Methods: By retrospective database analysis of the Vienna Tumor Registry, we evaluated the incidence of complications in 170 consecutive patients who have received a proximal femur KMFTR/GMRS at our institution between 1982 and 2007. 71 patients with an average age of 41.7 years (range 18.2–79.9 years) received the implant following the resection of a malignant bone tumor, 95 patients with an average age of 61.7 years (range 5.9–84.2 years) due to metastatic disease. The average time of follow-up was 3.5 years (SD ±4.9 years).

Results: Overall patient survival at five years was 32%. For patients with metastatic disease the overall survival was 10% at five years. Patients being treated for a primary bone tumor had an overall survival of 55% at 5 years. The overall survival of the prosthesis was 90% at two years and 72% at five years. Twenty-one patients (12.65%) suffered from dislocation after a mean time of 6.5 month (range 0.3–33 months) after surgery. Out of these, nine had to be treated by open reduction. Nine patients suffered recurrent dislocation after their first event. Patients who underwent extensive pelvic reconstruction had a significantly higher dislocation rate (33.3%) compared to patients with no or standard acetabular components (11.2%). Deep infection occurred in twelve patients (7.3%) after a mean of 39 months (range 1–166 months) after surgery. Treatment of infection was one-stage revision in eight and hip disarticulation in one patient. Two patients were successfully treated by local wound revision. One patient died of septic shock four days after surgery. Re-infection occurred in three patients. Aseptic loosing occurred in 13 patients (12.8%) after a mean time of 75.6 months (range 1–223 months) after surgery. Revision surgery was necessary in 27 patients (15.8%) with a mean time to first revision of 32 months (range 0.3–116 months). Prosthetic fracture was found in two patients. Local recurrence occurred in 14 patients (8.4%). In seven patients (4.2%) amputation was necessary.

Conclusion: Modular endoprosthesis allow excellent reconstruction of the proximal femur following tumor resection. However, the main complications, dislocation and infection, still remain considerable drawbacks.

Correspondence should be addressed to: EFORT Central Office, Technoparkstrasse 1, CH – 8005 Zürich, Switzerland. Tel: +41 44 448 44 00; Email: office@efort.org

Author: Stephan Puchner, Austria

E-mail: puchner@hotmail.com