Aims

Rotating-hinge knee prostheses are commonly used to reconstruct the distal femur after resection of a tumour, despite the projected long-term burden of reoperation due to complications. Few studies have examined the factors that influence their failure and none, to our knowledge, have used competing risk models to do so. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for failure of a rotating-hinge knee distal femoral arthroplasty using the Fine-Gray competing risk model.

Aims

Aseptic loosening is a major cause of failure in cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions. This paper presents the long-term outcomes of a custom-designed cross-pin fixation construct designed to minimize rotational stress and subsequent aseptic loosening in selected patients. The paper will also examine the long-term survivorship and modes of failure when using this technique.

We determined the efficacy of a devitalised autograft (n = 13) and allograft (n = 16) cortical strut bone graft combined with long-stem endoprosthetic reconstruction in the treatment of massive tumours of the lower limb. A total of 29 patients (18 men:11 women, mean age 20.1 years (12 to 45) with a ratio of length of resection to that of the whole prosthesis of > 50% were treated between May 2003 and May 2012. The mean follow-up was 47 months (15 to 132). The stem of the prosthesis was introduced through bone graft struts filled with cement, then cemented into the residual bone. Bone healing was achieved in 23 patients (86%). The mean Musculoskeletal Tumour Society functional score was 85% (57 to 97). The five-year survival rate of the endoprostheses was 81% (95% confidence intervals 67.3 to 92.3). The mean length of devitalised autografts and allografts was 8.6 cm (5 to 15), which increased the ratio of the the length of the stem of the prosthesis to that of the whole length of the prosthesis from a theoretical 35% to an actual 55%.

Cortical strut bone grafting and long-stem endoprosthetic reconstruction is an option for treating massive segmental defects following resection of a tumour in the lower limb. Patients can regain good function with a low incidence of aseptic loosening. The strut graft and the residual bone together serve as a satisfactory bony environment for a revision prosthesis, if required, once union is achieved.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:544–9.

Giant cell tumour is the most common aggressive benign tumour of the musculoskeletal system and has a high rate of local recurrence. When it occurs in proximity to the hip, reconstruction of the joint is a challenge. Options for reconstruction after wide resection include the use of a megaprosthesis or an allograft-prosthesis composite. We performed a clinical and radiological study to evaluate the functional results of a proximal femoral allograft-prosthesis composite in the treatment of proximal femoral giant cell tumour after wide resection. This was an observational study, between 2006 and 2012, of 18 patients with a mean age of 32 years (28 to 42) and a mean follow-up of 54 months (18 to 79). We achieved excellent outcomes using Harris Hip Score in 13 patients and a good outcome in five. All allografts united. There were no complications such as infection, failure, fracture or resorption of the graft, or recurrent tumour. Resection and reconstruction of giant cell tumours with proximal femoral allograft–prosthesis composite is a better option than using a prosthesis considering preservation of bone stock and excellent restoration of function.

A good result requires demanding bone banking techniques, effective measures to prevent infection and stability at the allograft-host junction.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1106–10.

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%).

Mechanical complications such as delayed union, fracture and failure of fixation were studied. The most adverse factor on the outcome was the use of intramedullary nails, followed by post-operative chemotherapy, resection length > 17 cm and age > 18 years at the time of intervention. The simultaneous use of a vascularised fibular graft to protect the allograft from mechanical complications improved the outcome, but the use of intramedullary cementing was not as successful.

In order to improve the strength of the reconstruction and to advance the biology of host–graft integration, we suggest avoiding the use of intramedullary nails and titanium plates, but instead using stainless steel plates, as these gave better results. The use of a supplementary vascularised fibular graft should be strongly considered in adult patients with resection > 17 cm and in those who require post-operative chemotherapy.

The best method of reconstruction after resection of malignant tumours of the tibial diaphysis is unknown. In the absence of any long-term studies analysing the results of intercalary endoprosthetic replacement, we present a retrospective review of 18 patients who underwent limb salvage using a tibial diaphyseal endoprosthetic replacement following excision of a malignant bone tumour. There were ten men and eight women with a mean age of 42.5 years (16 to 76). Mean follow-up was 58.5 months (20 to 141) for all patients and 69.3 months (20 to 141) for the 12 patients still alive. Cumulative patient survival was 59% (95% confidence interval (CI) 32 to 84) at five years. Implant survival was 63% (95% CI 35 to 90) at ten years. Four patients required revision to a proximal tibial replacement at a mean follow-up of 29 months (10 to 54). Complications included metastases in five patients, aseptic loosening in four, peri-prosthetic fracture in two, infection in one and local recurrence in one. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score and the mean Toronto Extremity Salvage Score were 23 (17 to 28) and 74% (53 to 91), respectively.

Although rates of complication and revision were high, custom-made tibial diaphyseal replacement following resection of malignant bone tumours enables early return to function and provides an attractive alternative to other surgical options, without apparent compromise of patient survival.

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.