The aim of this study was to establish what happens to patients
in the long term after endoprosthetic replacement for a primary
malignant tumour of bone. We conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained
database to identify all patients who had undergone an endoprosthetic
replacement more than 25 years ago and who were still alive. Their
outcomes were investigated with reference to their complications and
need for further surgery. A total of 230 patients were identified.
Their mean age at diagnosis was 20.7 years (five to 62). The most
common diagnosis was osteosarcoma (132). The most common site was
the distal femur (102). Aims
Patients and Methods
The aims of this retrospective study were to report the feasibility
of using 3D-printing technology for patients with a pelvic tumour
who underwent reconstruction. A total of 35 patients underwent resection of a pelvic tumour
and reconstruction using 3D-printed endoprostheses between September
2013 and December 2015. According to Enneking’s classification of
bone defects, there were three Type I lesions, 12 Type II+III lesions,
five Type I+II lesions, two Type I+II+III lesions, ten type I+II+IV
lesions and three type I+II+III+IV lesions. A total of three patients
underwent reconstruction using an iliac prosthesis, 12 using a standard
hemipelvic prosthesis and 20 using a screw-rod connected hemipelvic
prosthesis.Aims
Patients and Methods
We report our early experience with a new peri-acetabular reconstruction endoprosthesis used for pelvic reconstruction after tumour resection. The outcome of 21 patients who underwent limb salvage following type II pelvic resection and reconstruction using the peri-acetabular reconstruction prosthesis between 2000 and 2006 was retrospectively reviewed. This prosthesis was designed to use the remaining part of the ilium to support a horizontally placed acetabular component secured with internal fixation and bone cement. Into this device a constrained acetabular liner is positioned which is articulates with a conventional femoral component to which a modular extension and modular head are attached. The mean follow-up was 20.5 months (1 to 77). The most common complications were deep infection, superficial wound infections, and dislocation. The mean musculoskeletal tumor society functional outcome score for the survivors was 20.1(11 to 27). We recommend the use of the peri-acetabular reconstruction prosthesis for reconstruction of large defects after type II pelvic resection, as this design has a greater inherent stability over other available prostheses.
Endoprosthetic reconstruction following resection of 31 tumours of the proximal femur in 30 patients was performed using a Wagner SL femoral revision stem. The mean follow-up was 25.6 months (0.6 to 130.0). Of the 28 patients with a metastasis, 27 died within a mean follow-up period of 18.1 months (0.6 to 56.3) after the operation, and the remaining patient was excluded from the study 44.4 months post-operatively when the stem was removed. The two patients with primary bone tumours were still alive at the latest follow-up of 81.0 and 130.0 months, respectively. One stem only was removed for suspected low-grade infection 44.4 months post-operatively. The worst-case survival rate with removal of the stem for any cause and/or loss to follow-up was 80.0% (95% confidence interval 44.9 to 100) at 130.0 months. The mean Karnofsky index increased from 44.2% (20% to 70%) pre-operatively to 59.7% (0% to 100%) post-operatively, and the mean Merle d’Aubigné score improved from 4.5 (0 to 15) to 12.0 (0 to 18). The mean post-operative Musculoskeletal Tumour Society score was 62.4% (3.3% to 100%). The Wagner SL femoral revision stem offers an alternative to special tumour prostheses for the treatment of primary and secondary tumours of the proximal femur. The mid-term results are very promising, but long-term experience is necessary.
Massive endoprostheses using a cemented intramedullary stem are widely used to allow early resumption of activity after surgery for tumours. The survival of the prosthesis varies with the anatomical site, the type of prosthesis and the mode of fixation. Revision surgery is required in many cases because of aseptic loosening. Insertion of a second cemented endoprosthesis may be difficult because of the poor quality of the remaining bone, and loosening recurs quickly. We describe a series of 14 patients with triplate fixation in difficult revision or joint-sparing tumour surgery with a minimum follow-up of four years. The triplate design incorporated well within a remodelled cortex to achieve osseomechanical integration with all patients regaining their original level of function within five months. Our preliminary results suggest that this technique may provide an easy, biomechanically friendly alternative to insertion of a further device with an intramedullary stem, which has a shorter lifespan in revision or joint-sparing tumour surgery. A short segment of bone remaining after resection of a tumour will not accept an intramedullary stem, but may be soundly fixed using this method.
We used a knee-sparing distal femoral endoprosthesis in young patients with malignant bone tumours of the distal femur in whom it was possible to resect the tumour and to preserve the distal femoral condyles. The proximal shaft of the endoprosthesis had a coated hydroxyapatite collar, while the distal end had hydroxyapatite-coated extracortical plates to secure it to the small residual femoral condylar fragment. We reviewed the preliminary results of this endoprosthesis in eight patients with primary bone tumours of the distal femur. Their mean age at surgery was 17.years (14 to 21). The mean follow-up was 24 months (20 to 31). At final follow-up the mean flexion at the knee was 102° (20° to 120°) and the mean Musculoskeletal Tumour Society score was 80% (57% to 96.7%). There was excellent osteointegration at the prosthesis-proximal bone interface with formation of new bone around the hydroxyapatite collar. The prosthesis allowed preservation of the knee and achieved a good functional result. Formation of new bone and remodelling at the interface make the implant more secure. Further follow-up is required to determine the long-term structural integrity of the prosthesis.