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

ENDOPROSTHETIC REPLACEMENT (EPR) IN THE LOWER LIMB – A RECONSTRUCTIVE OPTION FOLLOWING COMPLEX TRAUMA



Abstract

Introduction: Although originally designed to aid the management of primary malignant bone tumours, the indications for modular endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) have expanded to include complex periprosthetic fractures and failed internal fixation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the success of endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) in patients who had undergone limb salvage following complex trauma presentations.

Materials and Methods: Between 2003 and 2008 twenty one patients presented with complex trauma related problems and underwent EPR at a specialist tertiary referral centre. The mean age was 71 years (range 44–87) and the median number of previous surgical procedures was 3 (range 0–11). Eight patients presented following failed internal fixation of proximal femoral fractures. Nine patients had periprosthetic fractures around joint arthroplasties, seven relating to total knee replacements (TKRs) and two to total hip replacements (THRs). One case of periprosthetic fracture around THR had undergone failed internal fixation. Two patients had distal femoral fractures, of which one was infected and had undergone failed internal fixation, while the other was unreconstruc-table. Two patients had proximal tibia fractures which had both undergone failed internal fixation.

Results: The mean Harris Hip Score was 89.5 (range 64–85) at a mean follow up period of 8 months (minimum 4 months). The mean American Knee Society Score was 82 (range 62–100) and the mean functional score was 62 (range 30–75) at a mean follow up period of 6 months (minimum 2 months). Complications included two cases of deep infection; one resulted in a two stage revision procedure, while the other retained the EPR following a washout.

Conclusion: Modular EPR in the lower limb is a durable reconstructive option in complex trauma problems, particularly in the elderly and those patients with significant bone loss. Preliminary functional results indicate very satisfactory results.

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: Benjamin Dean, United Kingdom

E-mail: bendean1979@gmail.com