A total of 157 hindquarter amputations were carried out in our institution during the last 30 years. We have investigated the reasons why this procedure is still required and the outcome. This operation was used as treatment for 13% of all pelvic bone sarcomas. It was curative in 140 and palliative in 17, usually to relieve pain. There were 90 primary procedures (57%) with the remaining 67 following the failure of previous operations to control the disease locally. The indication for amputation in primary disease was for large tumours for which limb-salvage surgery was no longer feasible. The peri-operative mortality was 1.3% (n = 2) and major complications of wound healing or infection arose in 71 (45%) patients. The survival at five years after hindquarter amputation with the intent to cure was 45%, and at ten years 38%. Local recurrence occurred in 23 patients (15%). Phantom pain was a significant problem, and only 20% used their prosthesis regularly. Functional scores were a mean of 57%. With careful patient selection the oncological results and functional outcomes of hindquarter amputation justify its continued use.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:127–31.

We undertook a cemental unipolar proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacement in 131 patients with a mean age of 50 years (2 to 84). Primary malignant tumours were present in 54 patients and 67 had metastatic disease. In addition, eight patients had either lymphoma or myeloma and two had non-oncological disorders. The mean follow-up was 27 months (0 to 180). An acetabular revision was required later in 14 patients, 12 of whom had been under the age of 21 years at the time of insertion of their original prosthesis. The risk of acetabular revision in patients over 21 years of age was 8% at five years compared with 36% in those aged under 21 years. All the unipolar hips in this younger age group required revision within 11 years of the initial operation.

We conclude that unipolar replacement should not be used in younger patients and should be avoided in patients with a life expectancy of more than five years.

Endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal femur may be required to treat primary bone tumours or destructive metastases either with impending or established pathological fracture. Modular prostheses are available off the shelf and can be adapted to most reconstructive situations for this purpose. We have assessed the clinical and functional outcome of using the METS (Stanmore Implants Worldwide) modular tumour prosthesis to reconstruct the proximal femur in 100 consecutive patients between 2001 and 2006. We compared the results with the published series for patients managed with modular and custom-made endoprosthetic replacements for the same conditions.

There were 52 males and 48 females with a mean age of 56.3 years (16 to 84) and a mean follow-up of 24.6 months (0 to 60). In 65 patients the procedure was undertaken for metastases, in 25 for a primary bone tumour, and in ten for other malignant conditions. A total of 46 patients presented with a pathological fracture, and 19 presented with failed fixation of a previous pathological fracture. The overall patient survival was 63.6% at one year and 23.1% at five years, and was significantly better for patients with a primary bone tumour than for those with metastatic tumour (82.3% vs 53.3%, respectively at one year (p = 0.003)). There were six early dislocations of which five could be treated by closed reduction. No patient needed revision surgery for dislocation. Revision surgery was required by six (6%) patients, five for pain caused by acetabular wear and one for tumour progression. Amputation was needed in four patients for local recurrence or infection.

The estimated five-year implant survival with revision as the endpoint was 90.7%. The mean Toronto Extremity Salvage score was 61% (51% to 95%). The implant survival and complications resulting from the use of the modular system were comparable to the published series of both custom-made and other modular proximal femoral implants.

We conclude that at intermediate follow-up the modular tumour prosthesis for proximal femur replacement provides versatility, a low incidence of implant-related complications and acceptable function for patients with metastatic tumours, pathological fractures and failed fixation of the proximal femur. It also functions as well as a custom-made endoprosthetic replacement.

We have analysed the pattern of symptoms in patients presenting with synovial sarcoma to identify factors which led to long delays in diagnosis. In 35 children, the early symptoms and the results of clinical and radiological investigation were reviewed, along with the presumed diagnoses. The duration of symptoms was separated into patient delay and doctor delay.

Only half of the patients had one or more of the four clinical findings suggestive of sarcoma according to the guidance of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence at the onset of symptoms. Of the 33 children for whom data were available, 16 (48.5%) presented with a painless mass and in ten (30.3%) no mass was identified. Seven (21.2%) had an unexplained joint contracture. Many had been extensively investigated unsuccessfully. The mean duration of symptoms was 98 weeks (2 to 364), the mean patient delay was 43 weeks (0 to 156) and the mean doctor delay was 50 weeks (0 to 362). The mean number of doctors seen before referral was three (1 to 6) and for 15 patients the diagnosis was obtained after unplanned excision. Tumours around the knee and elbow were associated with a longer duration of symptoms and longer doctor delay compared with those at other sites. Delays did not improve significantly over the period of our study of 21 years, and we were unable to show that delay in diagnosis led to a worse prognosis.

Our findings highlight the variety of symptoms associated with synovial sarcoma and encourage greater awareness of this tumour as a potential diagnosis in childhood.

We investigated whether our policy of routine re-excision of the tumour bed after an unplanned excision of a soft-tissue sarcoma was justified.

Between April 1982 and December 2005, 2201 patients were referred to our hospital with the diagnosis of soft-tissue sarcoma, of whom 402 (18%) had undergone an unplanned excision elsewhere. A total of 363 (16.5%) were included in this study. Each patient was routinely restaged and the original histology was reviewed. Re-excision was undertaken in 316 (87%). We analysed the patient, tumour and treatment factors in relation to local control, metastasis and overall survival.

Residual tumour was found in 188 patients (59%). There was thus no residual disease in 128 patients of whom 10% (13) went on to develop a local recurrence. In 149 patients (47%), the re-excision specimen contained residual tumour, but it had been widely excised. Local recurrence occurred in 30 of these patients (20%). In 39 patients (12%), residual tumour was present in a marginal resection specimen. Of these, 46% (18) developed a local recurrence. A final positive margin in a high-grade tumour had a 60% risk of local recurrence even with post-operative radiotherapy.

Metastases developed in 24% (86). The overall survival was 77% at five years. Survival was related to the grade of the tumour and the finding of residual tumour at the time of re-excision.

We concluded that our policy of routine re-excision after unplanned excision of soft-tissue sarcoma was justified in view of the high risk of finding residual tumour.