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. Patients and Methods. A review of 658 consecutive, prospectively collected cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions for oncological diagnoses at a single centre between 1980 and 2017 was performed. A total of 51 patients were identified with 56 endoprosthetic implants with cross-pin fixation, 21 of which were implanted following primary resection of tumour. Locations included distal femoral (n = 36), proximal femoral (n = 7), intercalary (n = 6), proximal humeral (n = 3), proximal tibial (n = 3), and distal humeral (n = 1). Results. The median follow-up was 132 months (interquartile range (IQR) 44 to 189). In all, 20 stems required revision: eight for infection, five for structural failure, five for aseptic loosening, and two for tumour progression. Mechanical survivorship at five, ten, and 15 years was 84%, 78%, and 78%, respectively. Mechanical failure rate varied by location, with no mechanical failures of proximal femoral constructs and distal femoral survivorship of 82%, 77%, and 77% at five, ten, and 15 years. The survivorship of primary constructs at five years was 74%, with no failure after 40 months, while the survivorship for revision constructs was 89%, 80%, and 80% at five, ten, and 15 years. . Conclusion. The rate of mechanical survivorship in our series is similar to those reported for other methods of reconstruction for short diaphyseal segments, such as compressive osseointegration. The mechanical failure rate differed by location, while there was no substantial difference in long-term survival between primary and revision reconstructions. Overall, custom cross-pin fixation is a viable option for endoprosthetic reconstruction of short metaphyseal segments with an acceptable rate of mechanical failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:724–731

Aims. We aimed to examine the long-term mechanical survivorship, describe the modes of all-cause failure, and identify risk factors for mechanical failure of all-polyethylene tibial components in endoprosthetic reconstruction. Methods. This is a retrospective database review of consecutive endoprosthetic reconstructions performed for oncological indications between 1980 and 2019. Patients with all-polyethylene tibial components were isolated and analyzed for revision for mechanical failure. Outcomes included survival of the all-polyethylene tibial component, revision surgery categorized according to the Henderson Failure Mode Classification, and complications and functional outcome, as assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score at the final follow-up. Results. A total of 278 patients were identified with 289 all-polyethylene tibial components. Mechanical survival was 98.4%, 91.1%, and 85.2% at five, ten and 15 years, respectively. A total of 15 mechanical failures were identified at the final follow-up. Of the 13 all-polyethylene tibial components used for revision of a previous tibial component, five (38.5%) failed mechanically. Younger patients (< 18 years vs > 18 years; p = 0.005) and those used as revision components (p < 0.001) had significantly increased rates of failure. Multivariate logistic regression modelling showed revision status to be a positive risk factor for failure (odds ratio (OR) 19.498, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.598 to 82.676) and increasing age was a negative risk factor for failure (OR 0.927, 95% CI 0.872 to 0.987). Age-stratified risk analysis showed that age > 24 years was no longer a statistically significant risk factor for failure. The final mean MSTS score for all patients was 89% (8.5% to 100.0%). Conclusion. The long-term mechanical survivorship of all-polyethylene tibial components when used for tumour endoprostheses was excellent. Tumour surgeons should consider using these components for their durability and the secondary benefits of reduced cost and ease of removal and revision. However, caution should be taken when using all-polyethylene tibial components in the revision setting as a significantly higher rate of mechanical failure was seen in this group of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(2):170–176

Aims. Instability of the hip is the most common mode of failure after reconstruction with a proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) using an endoprosthesis after excision of a tumour. Small studies report improved stability with capsular repair of the hip and other techniques, but these have not been investigated in a large series of patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate variables associated with the patient and the operation that affect post-operative stability. We hypothesised an association between capsular repair and stability. Patients and Methods. In a retrospective cohort study, we identified 527 adult patients who were treated with a PFA for tumours. Our data included demographics, the pathological diagnosis, the amount of resection of the abductor muscles, the techniques of reconstruction and the characteristics of the implant. We used regression analysis to compare patients with and without post-operative instability. Results. A total of 20 patients out of 527 (4%) had instability which presented at a mean of 35 days (3 to 131) post-operatively. Capsular repair was not associated with a reduced rate of instability. Bivariate analysis showed that a posterolateral surgical approach (odds ratio (OR) 0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.86) and the type of implant (p = 0.046) had a significant association with reduced instability; age > 60 years predicted instability (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 9.98). Multivariate analysis showed age > 60 years (OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.23 to 21.07), female gender (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.89), a malignant primary bone tumour (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.95), and benign condition (OR 5.56, 95% CI 1.35 to 22.90), but not metastatic disease or soft-tissue tumours, predicted instability, while a posterolateral approach (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.53) was protective against instability. No instability occurred when a synthetic graft was used in 70 patients. Conclusion. Stability of the hip after PFA is influenced by variables associated with the patient, the pathology, the surgical technique and the implant. We did not find an association between capsular repair and improved stability. Extension of the tumour often dictates surgical technique; however, our results indicate that PFA using a posterolateral approach with a hemiarthroplasty and synthetic augment for soft-tissue repair confers the lowest risk of instability. Patients who are elderly, female, or with a primary benign or malignant bone tumour should be counselled about an increased risk of instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:531–7

Aims

For rare cases when a tumour infiltrates into the hip joint, extra-articular resection is required to obtain a safe margin. Endoprosthetic reconstruction following tumour resection can effectively ensure local control and improve postoperative function. However, maximizing bone preservation without compromising surgical margin remains a challenge for surgeons due to the complexity of the procedure. The purpose of the current study was to report clinical outcomes of patients who underwent extra-articular resection of the hip joint using a custom-made osteotomy guide and 3D-printed endoprosthesis.

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

Aims

Proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacements (PFEPRs) are the most common reconstruction option for osseous defects following primary and metastatic tumour resection. This study aimed to compare the rate of implant failure between PFEPRs with monopolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasties and acetabular arthroplasties, and determine the optimum articulation for revision PFEPRs.

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. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 209 consecutive patients who, between 1991 and 2016, had undergone resection of the distal femur for tumour and reconstruction using a rotating-hinge knee prosthesis. The study endpoint was failure of the prosthesis, defined as removal of the femoral component, the tibial component, or the bone-implant fixation; major revision (exchange of the femoral component, tibial component, or the bone-implant fixation); or amputation. Results. Multivariate Fine-Gray regression analyses revealed different hazards for each Henderson failure mode: percentage of femoral resection (p = 0.001) and extent of quadriceps muscle resection (p = 0.005) for overall prosthetic failure; extent of quadriceps muscle resection (p = 0.002) and fixation of femoral component (p = 0.011) for type 2 failure (aseptic loosening); age (p = 0.009) and percentage of femoral resection (p = 0.019) for type 3 failure (mechanical failure); and type of joint resection (p = 0.037) for type 4 (infection) were independent predictors. A bone stem ratio of > 2.5 reliably predicted aseptic loosening. Conclusion. We identified independent risk factors for overall and cause-specific prosthetic failure after rotating-hinge knee distal femoral arthroplasty using a competing risk Fine-Gray model. A bone stem ratio > 2.5 reliably predicts aseptic loosening. An accurate knowledge of the risks of distal femoral arthroplasty after resection for tumour assists surgical planning and managing patient expectations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1405–1413

Aims

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.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to report the long-term results of extendable endoprostheses of the humerus in children after the resection of a bone sarcoma.

Aims

The aim of this study was to report the results of custom-made endoprostheses with extracortical plates plus or minus a short, intramedullary stem aimed at preserving the physis after resection of bone sarcomas in children.

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prosthesis characteristics and associated conditions that may modify the survival of total femoral endoprosthetic replacements (TFEPR).

Aims

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.

Aims

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.

Previous classification systems of failure of limb salvage focused primarily on endoprosthetic failures and lacked sufficient depth for the effective study of the causes of failure. In order to address these inadequacies, the International Society of Limb Salvage (ISOLS) formed a committee to recommend revisions of the previous systems. The purpose of this study was to report on their recommendations. The modifications were prepared using an earlier, evidence-based model with subclassification based on the existing medical literature. Subclassification for all five primary types of failure of limb salvage following endoprosthetic reconstruction were formulated and a complementary system was derived for the failure of biological reconstruction. An additional classification of failure in paediatric patients was also described.

Limb salvage surgery presents a complex array of potential mechanisms of failure, and a complete and precise classification of types of failure is required. Earlier classification systems lacked specificity, and the evidence-based system outlined here is designed to correct these weaknesses and to provide a means of reporting failures of limb salvage in order to allow the interpretation of outcome following reconstructive surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1436–40.

We undertook a retrospective review of 33 patients who underwent total femoral endoprosthetic replacement as limb salvage following excision of a malignant bone tumour. In 22 patients this was performed as a primary procedure following total femoral resection for malignant disease. Revision to a total femoral replacement was required in 11 patients following failed segmental endoprosthetic or allograft reconstruction. There were 33 patients with primary malignant tumours, and three had metastatic lesions. The mean age of the patients was 31 years (5 to 68). The mean follow-up was 4.2 years (9 months to 16.4 years). At five years the survival of the implants was 100%, with removal as the endpoint and 56% where the endpoint was another surgical intervention. At five years the patient survival was 32%. Complications included dislocation of the hip in six patients (18%), local recurrence in three (9%), peri-prosthetic fracture in two and infection in one. One patient subsequently developed pulmonary metastases. There were no cases of aseptic loosening or amputation. Four patients required a change of bushings. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumour Society functional outcome score was 67%, the mean Harris Hip Score was 70, and the mean Oxford Knee Score was 34.

Total femoral endoprosthetic replacement can provide good functional outcome without compromising patient survival, and in selected cases provides an effective alternative to amputation.

We reviewed retrospectively the results in 211 consecutive patients who had undergone limb salvage for bone neoplasia with endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur (96), distal femur (78), proximal tibia (30) and total femur (7). Their mean age was 50 years (11 to 86) and the mean follow-up period was 37.3 months (1 to 204). A total of 35 (16.6%) prostheses failed. Overall, implant survival was 78% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.54) at five years, 60% (95% CI 0.93 to 2.35) at ten years and 60% (95% CI 1.27 to 3.88) at 15 years. Survivorship of the limb was 97.6% (95% CI 1.73 to 3.35) at ten years. The gender, age, diagnosis and location of the tumour were not prognostic variables for failure. Modular endoprosthetic replacement in the lower limb is a durable long-term reconstructive option, with the implants generally outlasting the patient.