Hip reconstruction after resection of a periacetabular chondrosarcoma is complex and associated with a high rate of complications. Previous reports have compared no reconstruction with historical techniques that are no longer used. The aim of this study was to compare the results of tantalum acetabular reconstruction to both historical techniques and no reconstruction. We reviewed 66 patients (45 males and 21 females) with a mean age of 53 years (24 to 81) who had undergone acetabular resection for chondrosarcoma. A total of 36 patients (54%) underwent acetabular reconstruction, most commonly with a saddle prosthesis (n = 13; 36%) or a tantalum total hip arthroplasty (THA) (n = 10; 28%). Mean follow-up was nine years (SD 4).Aims
Methods
Aims
Patients and Methods
Pelvic reconstruction after the resection of a tumour around
the acetabulum is a challenging procedure due to the complex anatomy
and biomechanics. Several pelvic endoprostheses have been introduced,
but the rates of complication remain high. Our aim was to review
the use of a stemmed acetabular pedestal cup in the management of
these patients. The study involved 48 patients who underwent periacetabular reconstruction
using a stemmed pedestal cup (Schoellner cup; Zimmer Biomet Inc.,
Warsaw, Indiana) between 2000 and 2013. The indications for treatment included
a primary bone tumour in 27 patients and metastatic disease in 21
patients. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was
52 years (16 to 83).Aims
Patients and Methods
We evaluated the clinical results and complications
after extra-articular resection of the distal femur and/or proximal
tibia and reconstruction with a tumour endoprosthesis (MUTARS) in
59 patients (mean age 33 years (11 to 74)) with malignant bone or
soft-tissue tumours. According to a Kaplan–Meier analysis, limb
survival was 76% (95% confidence interval (CI) 64.1 to 88.5) after
a mean follow-up of 4.7 years (one month to 17 years). Peri-prosthetic infection
was the most common indication for subsequent amputation (eight
patients). Survival of the prosthesis without revision was 48% (95%
CI 34.8 to 62.0) at two years and 25% (95% CI 11.1 to 39.9) at five years
post-operatively. Failure of the prosthesis was due to deep infection
in 22 patients (37%), aseptic loosening in ten patients (17%), and
peri-prosthetic fracture in six patients (10%). Wear of the bearings
made a minor revision necessary in 12 patients (20%). The mean Musculoskeletal
Tumor Society score was 23 (10 to 29). An extensor lag >
10° was
noted in ten patients (17%). These results suggest that limb salvage after extra-articular
resection with a tumour prosthesis can achieve good functional results
in most patients, although the rates of complications and subsequent
amputation are higher than in patients treated with intra-articular
resection. Cite this article:
We have reviewed five adult patients treated with endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal radius following resection of non-traumatic lesions. The patients had a mean age of 33.4 years (20 to 60) at the time of surgery and the mean follow-up was 7.6 years (0.8 to 16). Following surgery, all elbows were clinically stable and there was 100% survivorship of the prosthesis. Evaluation of function was assessed clinically and by the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, achieving a mean of 86% (70 to 100). Results at medium-term follow-up are encouraging with regards to elbow stability, implant survivorship and functional outcome.
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.
We have made a retrospective study of 1001 custom-made prostheses used as replacements after surgery for bone tumours. There were 493 distal femoral, 263 proximal femoral and 245 proximal tibial prostheses. Aseptic loosening was shown to be the principal mode of failure of the implants, and 71 patients had revision for aseptic loosening of a cemented intramedullary stem. The probability of a patient surviving aseptic loosening for 120 months was 93.8% for a proximal femoral replacement, 67.4% for a distal femoral prosthesis and 58% for a proximal tibial implant. In patients with distal femoral replacements the age of the patient at the time of operation and the percentage of bone resected were related to the risk of aseptic loosening. Young patients with distal femoral prostheses in whom a high percentage of the femur had been replaced had the poorest prognosis for survival without aseptic loosening. The percentage of bone removed had a significant effect in the proximal tibial replacement group, but the age of the patient did not. By contrast, neither the age nor the percentage of bone removed was a factor after proximal femoral replacement. The significance of these findings is discussed in relation to mechanical factors.
