Primary malignant bone and soft tissue tumours often occur in the lower extremities of active individuals including children, teenagers and young adults. Survivors routinely face long-term physical disability. Participation in sports is particularly important for active young people but the impact of sarcoma treatment is not widely recognised and clinicians may be unable to provide objective advice about returning to sports. We aimed to identify and summarise the current evidence for involvement in sports following treatment of lower limb primary malignant bone and soft tissue tumours. A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify relevant studies combining the main concepts of interest: (1) Bone/Soft Tissue Tumour, (2) Lower Limb, (3) Surgical Interventions and (4) Sports. Studies were selected according to eligibility criteria with the consensus of three authors. Customised data extraction and quality assessment tools were used. 22 studies were selected, published between 1985 – 2020, and comprising 1005 patients. Fifteen studies with data on return to sports including 705 participants of which 412 (58.4%) returned to some form of sport at a mean follow-up period of 7.6 years. Four studies directly compared limb sparing and amputation; none of these were able to identify a difference in sports participation or ability. Return to sports is important for patients treated for musculoskeletal tumours, however, there is insufficient published research to provide good information and support for patients. Future prospective studies are needed to collect better pre and post-treatment data at multiple time intervals and validated clinical and patient sports participation outcomes such as type of sports participation, level and frequency and a validated sports specific outcome score, such as UCLA assessment. In particular, more comparison between limb sparing and amputation would be welcome.
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). This was a retrospective analysis of clinical data relating to patients who underwent proximal tibial arthroplasty in our regional bone tumour centre from 2010 to 2018.Aims
Methods
A particular pattern of complex instability of the elbow is “the terrible triad”, in which elbow dislocation is associated with fractures of the coronoid and radial head. Other frequent patterns are the variant of Monteggia lesions (Bado II) described by Jupiter which is characterized by ulnar fracture associated with fracture-dislocation of proximal radius, and the articular fracture of the distal humerus associated with elbow dislocation. The goal of treatment is to restore the primary stabilizers of the elbow such as the coronoid process, olecranon and both collateral ligaments by internal fixation and reconstruction of the ligaments. If elbow stability obtained at operation is unsatisfactory or internal fixation not enough stable, there an indication for applying a dynamic external fixator (DEF). The latter allows:
the articular congruence to be maintained and the ligaments to heal in adequate tension and position, internal fixation and ligaments reconstruction to be protected, and immediate joint motion to be carried out. From 2005 to 2008, we treated surgically 31 patients with complex instability of the elbow. DEF was applied in 38% of cases, namely 3 terrible triads, 5 fracture-dislocations of Monteggia and 4 articular fractures of the humerus associated with elbow dislocation. The mean age of patients was 44 years (range 30–74). All patients underwent ORIF, reconstruction of ligaments and dynamic external fixation. The OptiROM elbow fixator was used In 2 patients, the Orthofix fixator in 1 and the DJD fixator in 9. In all cases, active elbow motion was allowed without restrictions from the second postoperative day. Indomethacin was consistently administered for 5 weeks to prevent heterotopic ossifications. The DEF was removed after 6 weeks. The mean follow-up was 25 months (range 5–44 months). At last follow-up, the clinical results, evaluated according to the MEPS, were excellent in 10 patients (83%), who had had a fast recovery of range of motion (ROM). The elbow was painless in all patients and stable in all but 1. Moderate osteoarthrosis was found in 60% of cases. Complications included: 1 elbow stiffness, 1 pseudarthrosis of capitulum humeri and trochlea, 1 transitory radial nerve palsy, and 1 superficial pin tract infection. In conclusion, DEF is a helpful tool for treatment of complex elbow instability, particularly when stable internal fixation cannot be obtained or instability persists after ligaments reconstruction. However, DEF increases morbidity, and implies a longer operative time and prolonged exposure to radiation.
determining the possible presence of anatomical variations of the safe-zone and analyzing the anatomical congruence of precontoured plates to this zone.
(flat) (25 %), (slightly concave) (63,6 %) and (markedly concave) (11,4 %), Adherence of a precoundered plate (Acumed) to the bone surface of the safe zone was performed independently by three of us, and the gap between plate and bone was measured. Plate adaptability was good in Type B, scarce in Type C and absent in Type A.
