Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 4 | Pages 260 - 268
1 Apr 2024
Broekhuis D Meurs WMH Kaptein BL Karunaratne S Carey Smith RL Sommerville S Boyle R Nelissen RGHH

Aims. Custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) play an important role in reconstructive orthopaedic surgery, particularly in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and pelvic tumour resection procedures. Accurate CTAC positioning is essential to successful surgical outcomes. While prior studies have explored CTAC positioning in rTHA, research focusing on tumour cases and implant flange positioning precision remains limited. Additionally, the impact of intraoperative navigation on positioning accuracy warrants further investigation. This study assesses CTAC positioning accuracy in tumour resection and rTHA cases, focusing on the differences between preoperative planning and postoperative implant positions. Methods. A multicentre observational cohort study in Australia between February 2017 and March 2021 included consecutive patients undergoing acetabular reconstruction with CTACs in rTHA (Paprosky 3A/3B defects) or tumour resection (including Enneking P2 peri-acetabular area). Of 103 eligible patients (104 hips), 34 patients (35 hips) were analyzed. Results. CTAC positioning was generally accurate, with minor deviations in cup inclination (mean 2.7°; SD 2.84°), anteversion (mean 3.6°; SD 5.04°), and rotation (mean 2.1°; SD 2.47°). Deviation of the hip centre of rotation (COR) showed a mean vector length of 5.9 mm (SD 7.24). Flange positions showed small deviations, with the ischial flange exhibiting the largest deviation (mean vector length of 7.0 mm; SD 8.65). Overall, 83% of the implants were accurately positioned, with 17% exceeding malpositioning thresholds. CTACs used in tumour resections exhibited higher positioning accuracy than rTHA cases, with significant differences in inclination (1.5° for tumour vs 3.4° for rTHA) and rotation (1.3° for tumour vs 2.4° for rTHA). The use of intraoperative navigation appeared to enhance positioning accuracy, but this did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. This study demonstrates favourable CTAC positioning accuracy, with potential for improved accuracy through intraoperative navigation. Further research is needed to understand the implications of positioning accuracy on implant performance and long-term survival. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):260–268


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.

Methods

We reviewed 15 patients over a five-year period (January 2017 to December 2022) who had undergone extra-articular resection of the hip joint due to malignant tumour using a custom-made osteotomy guide and 3D-printed endoprosthesis. Each of the 15 patients had a single lesion, with six originating from the acetabulum side and nine from the proximal femur. All patients had their posterior column preserved according to the surgical plan.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 5 | Pages 385 - 393
13 May 2024
Jamshidi K Toloue Ghamari B Ammar W Mirzaei A

Aims

Ilium is the most common site of pelvic Ewing’s sarcoma (ES). Resection of the ilium and iliosacral joint causes pelvic disruption. However, the outcomes of resection and reconstruction are not well described. In this study, we report patients’ outcomes after resection of the ilium and iliosacral ES and reconstruction with a tibial strut allograft.

Methods

Medical files of 43 patients with ilium and iliosacral ES who underwent surgical resection and reconstruction with a tibial strut allograft between January 2010 and October 2021 were reviewed. The lesions were classified into four resection zones: I1, I2, I3, and I4, based on the extent of resection. Functional outcomes, oncological outcomes, and surgical complications for each resection zone were of interest. Functional outcomes were assessed using a Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS).