The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of 3D-printed modular prostheses in patients who underwent joint-sparing limb salvage surgery (JSLSS) for malignant femoral diaphyseal bone tumours. We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients (13 males and four females) with femoral diaphyseal tumours who underwent JSLSS in our hospital.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of application of a 3D-printed megaprosthesis with hemiarthroplasty design for defects of the distal humerus or proximal ulna following tumour resection. From June 2018 to January 2020, 13 patients with aggressive or malignant tumours involving the distal humerus (n = 8) or proximal ulna (n = 5) were treated by en bloc resection and reconstruction with a 3D-printed megaprosthesis with hemiarthroplasty, designed in our centre. In this paper, we summarize the baseline and operative data, oncological outcome, complication profiles, and functional status of these patients.Aims
Methods
We have evaluated the survivorship, outcomes, and failures of an interlocking, reconstruction-mode stem-sideplate implant used to preserve the native hip joint and achieve proximal fixation when there is little residual femur during large endoprosthetic reconstruction of the distal femur. A total of 14 patients underwent primary or revision reconstruction of a large femoral defect with a short remaining proximal femur using an interlocking, reconstruction-mode stem-sideplate for fixation after oncological distal femoral and diaphyseal resections. The implant was attached to a standard endoprosthetic reconstruction system. The implant was attached to a standard endoprosthetic reconstruction system. None of the femoral revisions were amenable to standard cemented or uncemented stem fixation. Patient and disease characteristics, surgical history, final ambulatory statusAims
Methods
Aims
Patients and Methods
The use of a noninvasive growing endoprosthesis in the management
of primary bone tumours in children is well established. However,
the efficacy of such a prosthesis in those requiring a revision
procedure has yet to be established. The aim of this series was
to present our results using extendable prostheses for the revision
of previous endoprostheses. All patients who had a noninvasive growing endoprosthesis inserted
at the time of a revision procedure were identified from our database.
A total of 21 patients (seven female patients, 14 male) with a mean
age of 20.4 years (10 to 41) at the time of revision were included.
The indications for revision were mechanical failure, trauma or infection
with a residual leg-length discrepancy. The mean follow-up was 70
months (17 to 128). The mean shortening prior to revision was 44 mm
(10 to 100). Lengthening was performed in all but one patient with
a mean lengthening of 51 mm (5 to 140).Aims
Patients and Methods
Intercalary allografts following resection of a primary diaphyseal
tumour have high rates of complications and failures. At our institution
intercalary allografts are augmented with intramedullary cement
and fixed using compression plating. Our aim was to evaluate their
long-term outcomes. A total of 46 patients underwent reconstruction with an intercalary
allograft between 1989 and 2014. The patients had a mean age of
32.8 years (14 to 77). The most common diagnoses were osteosarcoma
(n = 16) and chondrosarcoma (n = 9). The location of the tumours
was in the femur in 21, the tibia in 16 and the humerus in nine. Function
was assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring
system and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS). The survival
of the graft and the overall survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.Aims
Patients and Methods
Aims. To assess complications and failure mechanisms of osteoarticular
allograft reconstructions for primary bone tumours. Patients and Methods. We retrospectively evaluated 38 patients (28 men, 74%) who were
treated at our institution with osteoarticular allograft reconstruction
between 1989 and 2010. Median age was 19 years (interquartile range
14 to 32). Median follow-up was 19.5 years (95% confidence interval
(CI) 13.0 to 26.1) when 26 patients (68%) were alive. In addition, we
systematically searched the literature for clinical studies on osteoarticular
allografts, finding 31 studies suitable for analysis. Results of
papers that reported on one site exclusively were pooled for comparison. Results. A total of 20 patients (53%) experienced graft failure, including
15 due to
Peri-acetabular tumour resections and their subsequent
reconstruction are among the most challenging procedures in orthopaedic
oncology. Despite the fact that a number of different pelvic endoprostheses
have been introduced, rates of complication remain high and long-term
results are mostly lacking. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the outcome
of reconstructing a peri-acetabular defect with a pedestal cup endoprosthesis
after a type 2 or type 2/3 internal hemipelvectomy. A total of 19 patients (11M:8F) with a mean age of 48 years (14
to 72) were included, most of whom had been treated for a primary
bone tumour (n = 16) between 2003 and 2009. After a mean follow-up
of 39 months (28 days to 8.7 years) seven patients had died. After
a mean follow-up of 7.9 years (4.3 to 10.5), 12 patients were alive,
of whom 11 were disease-free. Complications occurred in 15 patients.
Three had recurrent dislocations and three experienced aseptic loosening.
There were no mechanical failures. Infection occurred in nine patients,
six of whom required removal of the prosthesis. Two patients underwent
hindquarter amputation for local recurrence. The implant survival rate at five years was 50% for all reasons,
and 61% for non-oncological reasons. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor
Society score at final follow-up was 49% (13 to 87). Based on these poor results, we advise caution if using the pedestal
cup for reconstruction of a peri-acetabular tumour resection. Cite this article:
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 retrospectively reviewed 101 consecutive patients
with 114 femoral tumours treated by massive bone allograft at our
institution between 1986 and 2005. There were 49 females and 52
males with a mean age of 20 years (4 to 74). At a median follow-up
of 9.3 years (2 to 19.8), 36 reconstructions (31.5%) had failed.
The allograft itself failed in 27 reconstructions (24%).