Functional outcomes are important for patients with bone tumors undergoing lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction; however, there is limited empirical evidence evaluating function longitudinally. The objective of this study was to determine the changes in function over time in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstructions of the proximal femur, distal femur and proximal tibia. We conducted a secondary analysis of functional outcome data from the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial. Patient function was assessed with the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score 93 (MSTS) and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS), which were administered preoperatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Both instruments are scored from 0-100, with higher scores indicated greater function. Mean functional scores were evaluated over time and we explored for differences among patients undergoing proximal femur reconstructions (PFR), distal femur reconstructions (DFR) and proximal tibia reconstructions (PTR). The patient-importance of statistically significant differences in function was evaluated utilizing the minimally important difference (MID) of 12 for the MSTS and 11 for the TESS. We explored for differences in change scores between each time interval with paired t-tests. Differences based on endoprosthetic reconstruction undertaken were evaluated by analysis of variance and post-hoc comparisons using the Tukey test. A total of 573 patients were included. The overall mean MSTS and TESS scores were 77.1(SD±21) and 80.2(SD±20) respectively at 1-year post-surgery, demonstrating approximately a 20-point improvement from baseline for both instruments. When evaluating change scores over time by type of reconstruction, PFR patients experienced significant functional improvement during the 3-6 and 6-12 month follow-up intervals, DFR patients demonstrated significant improvements in function at each follow-up interval, and PTR patients reported a significant decrease in function from baseline to 3 months, and subsequent improvements during the 3-6 and 6-12 month intervals. On average, patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction of the lower extremity experience important improvements in function from baseline within the first year. Patterns of functional recovery varied significantly based on type of reconstruction performed. The results of this study will inform both clinicians and patients about the expected rehabilitation course and functional outcomes following endoprosthetic reconstruction of the lower extremity

Paediatric bone sarcomas around the knee are often amenable to either endoprosthetic reconstruction or rotationplasty. Cosmesis and durability dramatically distinguish these two options, although patient-reported functional satisfaction has been similar among survivors. However, the impact on oncological and surgical outcomes for these approaches has not been directly compared. We retrospectively reviewed all wide resections for bone sarcoma of the distal femur or proximal tibia that were reconstructed either with an endoprosthesis or by rotationplasty at our institution between June 2004 and December 2014 with a minimum two year follow-up. Pertinent demographic information, surgical and oncological outcomes were reviewed. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with statistical significance set at p<0.05. Thirty eight patients with primary sarcomas around the knee underwent wide resection and either endoprosthetic reconstruction (n=19) or rotationplasty (n=19). Groups were comparable in terms of demographic parameters and systemic tumour burden at presentation. We found that selection of endoprosthetic reconstruction versus rotationplasty did not impact overall survival for the entire patient cohort but was significant in subgroup analysis. Two-year overall survival was 86.7% and 85.6% in the endoprosthesis and rotationplasty groups, respectively (p=0.33). When only patients with greater than 90% chemotherapy-induced necrosis were considered, overall survival was significantly better in the rotationplasty versus endoprosthesis groups (100% vs. 72.9% at two years, p=0.013). Similarly, while event-free survival was not affected by reconstruction method (60.2% vs. 73.3% at two years for endoprosthesis vs rotationplasty, p=0.27), there was a trend towards lower local recurrence in rotationplasty patients (p=0.07). When surgical outcomes were considered, a higher complication rate was seen in patients that received an endoprosthesis compared to those who underwent rotationplasty. Including all reasons for re-operation, 78.9% (n=15) of the endoprosthesis patients required a minimum of one additional surgery compared with only 26.3% (n=5) among rotationplasty patients (p=0.003). The most common reasons for re-operation in endoprosthesis patients were wound breakdown/infection (n=6), limb length discrepancy (n=6) and periprosthetic fracture (n=2). Excluding limb length equalisation procedures, the average time to re-operation in this patient population was 5.6 months (range 1 week to 23 months). Similarly, the most common reason for a secondary procedure in rotationplasty patients was wound breakdown/infection, although only two patients experienced this complication. Average time to re-operation in this group was 23.8 months (range 5 to 49 months). Endoprosthetic reconstruction and rotationplasty are both viable limb-salvage options following wide resection of high-grade bony sarcomas located around the knee in the paediatric population. Endoprosthetic reconstruction is associated with a higher complication rate and may negatively impact local recurrence. Study of a larger number of patients is needed to determine whether the reconstructive choice affects survival

Aim. Deep infection following endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) of long bones is a devastating complication occurring in 15% of musculoskeletal tumour patients. The recently published PARITY Trial demonstrated that extending antibiotic prophylaxis from 24 hours to 5 days does not reduce infection rates. However, questions remain about the optimal antibiotic choice and dose. Method. A 23-question multiple-choice questionnaire was designed and piloted through an iterative feedback process until the final version was agreed by all authors. Open and closed-ended questions were used to gather information on practice and Likert-type scale responses were used to grade responses to ascertain surgeon perceptions and preferences. The online survey was sent to all surgeon delegates of the 34th Annual Meeting of the European Musculo-Skeletal Oncology Society in London in October 2022. Results. Amongst 61 respondents, 43 were based in Europe and 18 outside of Europe. The majority (48/61) had been in clinical practice over 11 years. Antibiotic choice. 1st or 2nd generation cephalosporins were the first line choice practiced among 49 (80.3%) of respondents. Of these, 39 responded had a 2nd line protocol for beta-lactam allergy which was most commonly clindamycin (18), vancomycin (11) or a combination of a glycopeptide or clindamycin plus gentamicin (4). Respondents changed their first line regimen for radiotherapy in 6/61, chemotherapy in 8/61 and tumour site in 20/61. Re-dosing. Intraoperative re-dosing intervals of 1st and 2nd generation cephalosporins ranged from 2 to 8 hourly. Re-dosing for blood loss ranged from never to when 2 litres was lost. Of the 47 respondents, 24 said intraoperative re-dosing is always reliably administered. Duration. Six (10%) of 61 respondent routinely cover the intraoperative period only, whereas 30 (49%) give 24 hours, 16 (give 48 hours or longer and 8 continue until surgical drains are removed. 31 of 61 change duration depending on clinical situation. The most common reasons for changing were patient risk factors, soft tissue status and previous radiotherapy. 57/61 surgeons were aware of the PARITY Trial. When these respondents were asked whether they had changed practice based on PARITY, 12 said yes, 24 said no and 21 said they always give 24 hours anyway. Conclusions. Amongst an international cohort of orthopaedic oncology surgeons there was a wide variation in practice. Further research should focus on the optimum choice and re-dosing strategy, which have not been defined

Functional outcomes are commonly reported in studies of musculoskeletal oncology patients undergoing limb salvage surgery; however, interpretation requires knowledge of the smallest amount of improvement that is important to patients – the minimally important difference (MID). We established the MIDs for the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Rating Scale (MSTS) and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) in patients with bone tumors undergoing lower limb salvage surgery. This study was a secondary analysis of the recently completed PARITY (Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery) study. This data was used to calculate: (1) the anchor-based MIDs using an overall function scale and a receiver operating curve analysis, and (2) the distribution-based MIDs based on one-half of the standard deviation of the change scores from baseline to 12-month follow-up, for both the MSTS and TESS. There were 591 patients available for analysis. The Pearson correlation coefficients for the association between changes in MSTS and TESS scores and changes in the external anchor scores were 0.71 and 0.57, indicating “high” and “moderate” correlation. Anchor-based MIDs were 12 points and 11 points for the MSTS and TESS, respectively. Distribution-based calculations yielded MIDs of 16-17 points for the MSTS and 14 points for the TESS. The current study proposes MID scores for both the MSTS and TESS outcome measures based on 591 patients with bone tumors undergoing lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. These thresholds will optimize interpretation of the magnitude of treatment effects, which will enable shared decision-making with patients in trading off desirable and undesirable outcomes of alternative management strategies. We recommend anchor-based MIDs as they are grounded in changes in functional status that are meaningful to patients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of custom-made endoprosthetic reconstruction for both tumourous and non-tumourous conditions around the elbow joint. 28 consecutive cases of endoprosthetic elbow reconstruction, performed between 1989 and 2003, were identified using the unit database. There were 12 males and 16 females, with a mean age 48.9 years, (range 14–84). There were 16 cases of malignant tumour (10 primary, 6 secondary), 3 cases of benign tumour (one each of giant cell tumour, osteoblastoma and pigmented villonodular synovitis) and 10 non-oncological cases, (5 cases of fracture, 3 failed total elbow replacements and 1 infected synostosis). A distal humeral prosthesis was used in 16 patients, distal humeral and proximal ulna in 10 patients, proximal ulna with a humeral component in one patient and proximal radial replacement in one patient. Clinical and radiographic review of all available patients, including a functional assessment with The Toronto Extremity Salvage score (TESS) was undertaken. 28 consecutive cases of endoprosthetic elbow reconstruction, performed between 1989 and 2003, were identified using the unit database. There were 12 males and 16 females, with a mean age 48.9 years, (range 14–84). There were 16 cases of malignant tumour (10 primary, 6 secondary), 3 cases of benign tumour (one each of giant cell tumour, osteoblastoma and pigmented villonodular synovitis) and 10 non-oncological cases, (5 cases of fracture, 3 failed total elbow replacements and 1 infected synostosis). A distal humeral prosthesis was used in 16 patients, distal humeral and proximal ulna in 10 patients, proximal ulna with a humeral component in one patient and proximal radial replacement in one patient. Clinical and radiographic review of all available patients, including a functional assessment with The Toronto Extremity Salvage score (TESS) was undertaken. Endoprosthetic reconstruction around the elbow joint is effective in a wide range of pathologies, allowing in most cases a reasonable level of function, even following two-stage revision for infection

Introduction: The population of the UK is getting older. Patients over the age of 80 (the older old) are increasingly presenting with musculoskeletal tumours that require major surgery. We have investigated the success or otherwise of endoprosthetic replacements after tumour excision in this population. Methods: We looked at an oncological database to identify patients over the age of 80 who had an endprosthetic replacement after tumour excision. We reviewed the records of all patients over the age of 80 who had an endoprosthetic replacement to assess the oncological and functional outcomes of the procedure. Results: 17 patients over the age of 80 had an endoprosthesis over the past 10 years. The main indication was for metastatic disease (9 patients) but 6 had primary malignant bone tumours. The most common site was the distal femur in 9 followed by the proximal femur in 5. Most of the patients had associated co-morbidity (12 were ASA 2 or 3). There were no perioperative deaths but 2 patients had early complications with one having a paralytic ileus and one a chest infection. The median survival of the patients was 2 years with death being due to progressive metastases in most. 3 had late complications to do with the prosthesis including one infection in a proximal tibial replacement and a late dislocation at 2 years in a proximal femoral replacement. Two patients developed local recurrence treated by local excision and radiotherapy. There were no amputations or revisions. Conclusions: Endoprosthetic replacements have a useful role to play in the surgical management of elderly patients. Although they have significant comorbidity most do well. Functional results are less good than in the younger population but most patients regain their independence and are free of pain

Solitary plasmacytomas in the appendicular skeleton are rare monoclonal expansions of plasmacytoid cells. They are two main hazards; local destruction of bone with resultant loss of function and possible fracture, and progression to Myeloma. Between February 1988 and July 2005 seven patients (4 male, 3 female) were treated for solitary plasmacytoma with surgical resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction. The median age was 46.7 (35-75). The site was: distal humerus (2), proximal humerus (2) proximal femur (2) proximal tibia (1). Three patients had sustained a pathological fracture. Five patients had received pre-operative radiotherapy and three received post-operative radiotherapy. Mean follow-up is 8.6 years. Two cases became infected at 2 and 5 years post-operatively and have had revisions of their endoprosthesis. Both remain functional at 18 and 15 years. No patient has suffered a local recurrence. Two patients have progressed to multiple Myeloma but no patients have died. Literature review shows that the progression of solitary bone plasmacytoma to Myeloma is around 53% despite radiotherapy, in an average period of 2-4 years. With resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction, the progression in this series has been 28% despite an average follow up of 8.6 years. Although the numbers are small, due to the rarity of the condition, surgical resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction reduces disease progression than radiotherapy alone. This produces far superior results compared to the intramedullary nailing of the long bones for this condition. Endoprosthetic reconstruction after resection should be given consideration in cases of solitary plasmacytoma of the appendicular skeleton when there is extensive bone destruction present. The optimal timing of local radiotherapy to be combined with surgery is still to be established

Endoprosthetic Replacements are one of the most commonly used types of limb salvage following surgical excision of bone tumours. The advantages of Endoprosthetic Replacements are their initial reliability and the rapid restoration of function along with their ready availability. The problems with Endoprosthetic Replacements are the long term problems of wear, loosening, infection and mechanical failure. Increasing and insolvable problems may lead to the necessity for amputation. This paper assesses the risk of amputation following Endoprosthetic Replacement. A total of 1262 patients have undergone Endoprosthetic Replacement surgery at our centre in the past 34 years. They have a total of 6507 patient years of follow up. A total of 112 patients have had subsequent amputation (8. 9%). The reasons for amputation were local recurrence in 71(64. 4%), infection in 38(33. 9%), mechanical failure in 2(1. 8%) and continued pain in 1 case (0. 8%). The risk of amputation was greatest in the proximal tibia 15. 5% (n=38/246), followed by pelvis 10. 2%(5/49), and femur 7. 4% (n=58/784), whilst the risk of amputation was least in the humerus at 6. 4% (n= 1l/182). The time to amputation varied from 2 days to 16. 3 7 years, with a mean of 31 months. The risk of amputation decreased with time although 10% of the amputations took place more than 5 years after implantation. The greatest risk of amputation is in the first 5 years and is due to local recurrence, whilst infection poses the next greatest threat. The risk decreases with time. Attempts to control both local recurrence and infection will decrease the need for amputation. Late failure of the endoprosthetic replacements, even in young patients does not seen to be a major cause of amputation thus far

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of custom-made endoprosthetic reconstruction for both tumourous and non-tumourous conditions around the elbow joint. Methods and Results: 28 consecutive cases of endoprosthetic elbow reconstruction, performed between 1989 and 2003, were identified using the unit database. There were 12 males and 16 females, with a mean age of 48.9 years, (range 14–84). There were 16 cases of malignant tumour (10 primary, 6 secondary), 3 cases of benign tumour (one each of giant cell tumour, osteoblastoma and pigmented villonodular synovitis) and 10 non-oncological cases, (5 cases of fracture, 3 failed total elbow replacements and 1 infected synostosis). A distal humeral prosthesis was used in 16 patients, distal humeral and proximal ulna in 10 patients, proximal ulna with a humeral component in one patient and proximal radial replacement in one patient. Clinical and radiographic review of all available patients, including a functional assessment with The Toronto Extremity Salvage (TES) score was undertaken. The average follow-up was 54.9 months (range 5–144). 5 patients with malignancy died of their disease. One patient required amputation for local recurrence at 5 months. There were two revisions at 4 and 7 years for aseptic loosening of the humeral component. Six patients developed deep prosthetic infection at an average of 21 months (range 6–31), necessitating two-stage revision, of which one patient required subsequent excision arthroplasty. There were no cases of permanent nerve palsy. 18 patients (64.3%) were available for functional follow-up. Average flexion deformity was 33 degrees (7–80) and average flexion was 85 degrees (30–133). The mean TES score was 67.8 (range 36.6–96.6). The mean TES score following two-stage revision for infection, (available in 4/5 patients) was 73.9 (range 54.8–91.6). Conclusion: Custom-made endoprosthetic reconstruction around the elbow joint is effective in a wide range of pathologies, allowing in most cases a reasonable level of function, even following two-stage revision for infection

Introduction: The use of extendible endoprosthetic implants in the skeletally immature has been used for just under 30 years. Limb salvage has become a realistic alternative to those children presenting with primary bone sarcomas. We aim to review the use of an implant which uses a non-invasive mechanism of adjusting the length of the prosthesis, during the growth phase. Method: A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing primary or revision endoprosthetic replacement with non-invasive extensible implants, was undertaken. Between January 1993 and February 2008, 34 children were treated with non-invasive extensible endoprosthetic replacements, 26 distal femur, 5 total femurs, 3 proximal tibias and 1 proximal femur. Results: The underlying pathology, requiring excision, was Ewings sarcoma in 4 patients and osteosarcoma in the remaining 30 patients. Most underwent pre-operative chemotherapy and 2 patients died of their disease. Four operations were secondary procedures following previous non-grower implant failures (1 infection of previous EPR, 1 IM nail non-union, 1 failed allograft and a revision of a proximal femoral EPR to a total femoral prosthesis). Five patients required revision of the primary prosthesis (2 with motor failures, 3 due to prosthesis infections). Mean time to start lengthening from surgery was 12.2 months. The mean number of lengthenings was 4 with an average total length of 30 mm achieved, mean leg length difference was 0.8 cm. All lengthenings were undertaken with the patient fully alert, no adverse incidents occurred at the time or after lengthening. Discussion: The non-invasive prostheses show promise in handling the difficult problem of limb preservation in a growing child, with similar complication rates to that of an invasive type, but without the need for multiple anaesthetics for lengthening

Introduction: Total femoral endoprosthetic replacement can be an alternative to amputation following extensive tumour excision or in cases of severe bone loss. In skeletally immature patients the problem of leg length inequality may be overcome by the use of extendable prostheses. The aim of this study is to assess the functional outcome of patients following total femoral endoprosthetic replacement. Methods: This is a retrospective, single centre study of 16 patients who underwent consecutive total femoral replacements between 1978 and 1999. Information was collected from the Bone Tumour database, medical records and clinical review. The prostheses were custom made by the Biomedical Engineering Department of University College London and Stanmore Implants Worldwide. The implants are composed of a Titanium alloy shaft with Cobalt-Chrome bearing surfaces, incorporating a SMILES (Stanmore Modular Individualised Lower Extremity System) knee joint. Outcome was assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MTS) rating score. Sample: Eight patients were male and eight female. Mean age was 35 years (range 5–75 years). Ten patients underwent total femoral replacement as a primary procedure; nine for malignant tumour and one for hydatid disease. Of the patients with malignancy five had metastases at the time of presentation. The other indications were failed distal femoral replacement in four cases and periprosthetic fractures in the remaining two. Four children received extendable prostheses. Results: Of the patients with malignant disease, all but one had complete tumour excision. Three patients developed local recurrence. Two patients died of metastases within one year of diagnosis and three more died within five years. Three required revision procedures. Two more dislocated at the hip joint. Other complications included infection and lymphoedema. In patients surviving longer than one year the average range of motion at the hip was 85 degrees and at the knee 80 degrees. Using the MTS rating score the mean functional outcome was 60% of normal (range 27–90%). Of the survivors one achieved an excellent result, five were good, four fair and one poor. Conclusion: Total femoral endoprosthetic replacement can be effective in limb salvage and provide an alternative to amputation. Good functional results can often be achieved. However, the complication rate is high and the outcome extremely varied

Aims

The proximal tibia (PT) is the anatomical site most frequently affected by primary bone tumours after the distal femur. Reconstruction of the PT remains challenging because of the poor soft-tissue cover and the need to reconstruct the extensor mechanism. Reconstructive techniques include implantation of massive endoprosthesis (megaprosthesis), osteoarticular allografts (OAs), or allograft-prosthesis composites (APCs).

Purpose: The aim of this study was to understand the effect of endoprosthetic reconstruction in treatment of solitary bone plasmacytoma threatening structural integrity of bone. Materials and methods: We retrospectively studied 11 patients who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction for solitary bone plasmacytoma between 1988 and 2003 with more than 1 year follow up. Most had radiotherapy and those who sustained structural damage to a joint or thought to be salvageable were treated with endoprosthetic replacement. Results: There were 7 males and 4 females, with M: F ratio of 1.75:1, the median age at diagnosis was 53.61years (35–74). Average duration of symptoms prior to presentation at oncology unit was 7.27 months. We had 4 proximal femoral, 2 pelvic, 4 humeral and one tibial Plasmacytomas that were treated with endoprosthetic replacements.8/11 had preoperative radiotherapy for at least 4weeks and 3 did not. Two had postoperative radiotherapy and one adjuvant chemotherapy. Average follow up is 5.45 years (range 1–16years). We had one death due to unrelated causes, one progression to Myeloma treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, two revisions and one dislocation which was reduced by open method. The cumulative overall survival for all patients was 91% at 5 years. The cumulative risk of failure of reconstruction including; infection, dislocation, local recurrence/progression to Myeloma was 27% at 5 years. Conclusion: Literature review shows that nearly 53% of SBP progress despite radiotherapy to Myeloma at a median time of 1.8 years (2–4 years). But despite average follow up of 5.45 years, progression to Myeloma after endoprosthetic replacement at our unit is 9.09%. We concluded that the use of endoprostheses for reconstruction after excision of solitary bone plasmacytomas threatening structural integrity of bone combined with radiotherapy decreases the disease progression to Myeloma than radiotherapy alone and offers a reasonable but not absolute chance of cure

Aim. A case series with functional and radiographic outcomes, of modular endoprosthetic distal femoral replacement in complex cases of periprosthetic fracture. Method. Sixteen cases were identified of endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) from the bone and soft tissue cancer implant registry. A retrospective review was undertaken. Results. There were 11 periprosthetic fractures of total knee arthroplasty, 3 revision arthroplasty cases, and 3 cases of distal femoral fracture. Of which four were complicated by infection. AKSS scores ranged from 62-100, average 82, with 6 month minimum follow up. There were two post operative infections, both successfully treated. One femoral component required exchange for aseptic loosening at two years. Conclusion. EPR is an effective surgical procedure for complex cases with a demonstrable good functional outcome

The distal humerus represents 1% of all primary bone tumours. Endoprosthetic replacement can potentially improve function and provide good pain relief. We present out experience with the custom made Stanmore elbow endoprosthesis used after resection of malignant tumours of the distal humerus. Between 1970–2009 we carried out 19 endoprosthetic replacments for malignant tumours of the distal humerus. 10 were a result of metastasis and 9 were primary bone tumours. 7 patients had a pathological fracture as their first presentation and 3 had pathological fractures after the diagnosis was made. 11 patients died between 3 months to 16 year following surgery. The mean survival of the patient group was 7.1 years (range 3 months to 37 years). 4 patients underwent a revision EPR and one patient underwent two revision EPR's due to loosening. Two patients underwent maintenance procedures (rebushing) due to wear of the poly bushing. We have had no revisions since the design of hte implant was changed to a floppy hinge design. One patient underwent an above elbow amputation four years after surgery due to local recurrence. There were no early post operative infections. One patient developed a sinus requiring multiple wound explorations, one year after insertion of the endoprosthesis for a sarcoma. This patient was infection free till the time of death 3 years later. There were no nerve palsies, periprosthetic fractures or wound problems. The mean TES score was 72% (59–78%) in the surviving patients at review. As the majority of the patients were implanted for metastatic disease the initial reliablity and low complication rate of the procedure, in our series, confirms that this is a suitable reconstruction for patients in significant metastatic pain from a destructive lesion of the distal humerus, rapidly restoring function and relieving pain in a predictable manner

Introduction: Total scapular resection causes a significant functional loss because of the sacrifice of the glenoid, which serves as a stable base for shoulder motion. The authors analyze their experience with two types of reconstructions following total scapular resection; suspension of the humeral head from the clavicle without endoprosthetic reconstruction of the scapula and endoprosthetic scapular reconstruction. Materials and Methods: Between 1979 and 1997, the authors treated 23 patients with scapular tumors that required total scapular resection. Patients were diagnosed with 14 bone and 9 soft-tissue tumors. Resection included total scapulectomy in 12 patients and enbloc resection of the scapula and humeral head in 11 patients. Reconstruction: All eleven patients who had resection of their humeral head underwent reconstruction of the humerus with endoprosthesis. Scapular endoprosthesis was further installed in 7 patients and suspension of the humeral head from the clavicle with a Dacron tape was performed in 16 patients (Suspension of the prosthetic humeral head from the clavicle – 4 patients; suspension of the native humeral head from the clavicle – 12 patients). Endoprosthetic reconstruction of the scapula was feasible only when the periscapular musculature was sufficient for endoprosthetic attachment and coverage. The scapular prosthesis was attached to the prosthetic humeral head with a Goretex® sleeve, which served as an artificial joint capsule. All patients were followed for a minimum of 2 years; follow-up included physical examination, radiological evaluation and functional evaluation according to the American Musculoskeletal Tumor Society system. Results: Elbow range-of-motion and hand dexterity were similar in the two groups of patients. However, compared with patients who undergone humeral suspension, those who had scapular endoprosthesis had better abduction (60°–90° vs. 10°–20°) of the shoulder joint. Moreover, these patients had better cosmetic appearance of the shoulder girdle. There were no deep wound infections, prosthetic failures, or secondary amputations. Overall, 6 patients who had scapular prosthesis (86%) and 10 patients who had humeral suspension (62%) had a good-to-excellent functional outcome. Conclusions: The number of patients who underwent a scapular endoprosthetic reconstruction is small and does not allow a valid statistical analysis; however, the authors feel that scapular endoprosthesis reconstruction is associated with better functional and cosmetic outcomes, when compared to humeral suspension. The authors recommend reconstruction of the scapula with endoprosthesis when periscapular musculature, remaining after tumor resection allows attachment and coverage of the prosthesis

Segmental bone defects with complex fractures or chronic infections comprise a very special subset of patients. Modular endoprosthetic reconstruction is an operative solution. Without reconstruction amputation/disarticulation is the likely outcome. Aim of the study was to analyse preliminary results of modular endoprosthetic reconstruction in nonneoplastic limb salvage. 11 patients(9 – distal femoral replacement, 2 – total femoral replacement) underwent salvage reconstruction between January 2005 and March 2008 for chronic periprosthetic infections(6 – single stage revision; 2 – two stage revision) and complex periprosthetic fractures(3) with segmental bone defects. Microbiological and haematological evidence of infection was confirmed in the infection group and treated with concomitant community based antibiotic therapy as per guidance from specialist team. The mean age and follow up were 74.2 years and 27.5 months respectively. No intraoperative complications identified. Average post operative mobilisation was with frame at 5 days, 2 sticks at 2 weeks. 1 patient required plastic surgical intervention at index operation. 1 patient had recurrence of infection. Radiographs at 6, 12 & 24 months showed no changes from immediate post-op. Microbiological and haematological evidence of infection eradication was considered as successful treatment. Knee range of movements averaged full extension to 95 degrees. Oxford knee scores showed maximal improvement in the single stage revision group. We conclude that salvage endoprosthetic reconstruction has provided an oppourtunity to avoid amputation. A significant improvement in overall range of motion, knee scores, pain relief and stability was achieved in this highly complex subset of patients. Multidisciplinary support from plastic surgeons and specialist microbiologists is essential

We evaluated the effectiveness of local and free flap cover done at revision surgery for infected endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) in achieving ultimate control of infection. Methods: Ten patients needed plastic surgical input in the form of flap cover at the time of revision surgery for infective endoprosthetic failure between March 1999 and March 2005. The revision of EPR itself was undertaken in 2 stages. The 1st stage involved removal of the endoprosthesis, insertion of antibiotic spacer and flap cover. After achieving adequate control of infection, 2nd stage revision was carried out, in which the spacer was exchanged for an endoprosthesis. Results: Average age at time of flap surgery was 29 years (range 14 – 58 years). Average follow up was 23 months (3 to 72 months) for patients who remained free of infection and 19 months (5 to 52 months) for those who underwent amputation. 9 out of 10 patients underwent some form of muscle flap (6 free LD flaps, 2 gastrocnemius flaps and 1 pedicled LD flap). Infection was adequately controlled in 5 out of 6 patients in free flap group. Out of 4 patients who underwent local flaps, 2 ended up having amputation. Conclusion: Reconstructive surgery in the form of flap cover has an important role in limb salvage in patients with endoprosthetic failure due to infection. The aim of such surgery should be to provide as much new vascularized tissue over the dependent portions with sinuses and areas of radiotherapy with scarring. Results of cover by a broad flat musculocutaneous flaps seem to be better in comparison to local flaps

Parosteal osteosarcoma is an uncommon tumour. Different methods of surgical treatment have been reported. Aim of this study was to investigate differences in outcome after biological and prosthetic reconstruction. Since August 1969, 28 patients have been treated at our institution. Average age was 26 years, range 15 to 59 years. Patient data was retrospectively reviewed within the prospective database of the Vienna Tumour Registry. Average follow-up was 133.9 months, range 8.4 to 382.6 months. Two patients died of disease 8.4 and 81.4 months after operation, respectively, another patient died due to unrelated causes 330.4 months postoperatively. All surviving patients were followed for a minimum of 3.6 months. Location of the lesion was the distal femur (19), proximal humerus (four), proximal tibia (three), mid-diaphyseal and proximal femur (one each). In 12 patients endoprosthetic reconstruction was indicated. Biological reconstruction was performed in 11 patients. Three patients underwent rotationplasty, two patients were amputated. Eight of 12 patients with endoprostheses have been revised, five have had multiple revisions. Causes for revision were bushing wear (four), aseptic loosening (four), infection (three) and periprosthetic fracture (one). There was no local recurrence in the endoprosthetic group. Two of 11 patients with biological reconstruction underwent revision due to pseudarthrosis and femoral fracture, respectively. There were two cases of local recurrence requiring secondary amputation. Two patients with rotationplasty underwent revision for wound healing disturbance and thrombectomy, respectively. Three patients developed lung metastases, leading to death of disease in two cases of amputation and rotationplasty. One patient with endoprosthetic reconstruction was alive 129.0 months after pulmonary metastasectomy. Functional outcome was satisfactory in all patients; there were no significant differences between patients with endoprosthetic or biological reconstruction. Biological reconstruction showed less revisions compared to endoprostheses, however, exact preoperative planning is required to obtain clear margins of resection

The purpose of our study was to examine the survival and functional outcome of endoprosthetic replacements for non-oncology limb salvage purposes. Although initially designed for bone tumours, such is the versatility of these implants they can be used to salvage failed joint replacements, peri-prosthetic fractures, failed internal fixation and non-union. Thirty eight procedures were identified from September 1995 to June 2007 from a prospectively kept database, including 17 distal femoral replacements, 12 proximal femoral replacements, 4 proximal humeral replacements, 2 distal humeral replacements, 2 hemi-pelvic replacements and 1 total femoral replacement. The quality of patients’ mobility was used to assess functional outcome and the survival of the prosthesis was calculated using a Kaplan-Meier survival curve. The Kaplan-Meier implant survival was 91.3% at 5 years, 68.5% at 10 years and 45.7% at 20 years. The limb salvage survival for all reconstructions was 75% at 10 years. The best survival was as follows pelvic (n=0/2) and total femoral prostheses where there was no failure in either group (n=0/1). Distal femoral replacements survival was 91% at 5 years, a single humeral prosthesis failed at 11 years post surgery, and proximal femoral replacements had a survival at 87.5% at 5 years. Three implants failed, two as a result of infection and required staged revisions and 1 failed as a result of aseptic loosening. Two patients dislocated their proximal femoral replacements, both were treated successfully by closed reduction. Endoprosthetic replacement appears to be effective and the medium term survival is encouraging. The aim of a pain free functional limb is achievable with this technique. The complication rates are acceptable considering the salvage nature of these patients. We recommend referral of complex cases to a tertiary centre with expertise in this type of surgery