Introduction: The use of
The treatment of substantial proximal femoral
bone loss in young patients with developmental dysplasia of the
hip (DDH) is challenging. We retrospectively analysed the outcome
of 28 patients (30 hips) with DDH who underwent revision total hip
replacement (THR) in the presence of a deficient proximal femur,
which was reconstructed with an
The Vancouver classification separates periprosthetic femur fractures after THA into three regions (A - trochanteric, B - around or just below the stem, and C - well below the stem), with fractures around or just below the stem further separated into those with a well-fixed (B1) or loose stem and good (B2) or poor (B3) bone stock. Trochanteric fractures may be associated with osteolysis and require treatment that addresses osteolysis as well as ORIF of displaced fractures. Fractures around a well-fixed stem can be treated with ORIF using cerclage or cable plating, while those around a loose stem require implant revision usually to a longer cementless tapered or distally porous coated cementless stem. Fractures around a loose stem with poor bone stock in which salvage of the proximal femur is not possible require replacement of the proximal femur with an
The unacceptable failure rate of cemented femoral revisions led to many different cementless femoral designs employing fixation in the damaged proximal femur with biological coatings limited to this area. The results of these devices were uniformly poor and were abandoned for the most part by the mid-1990's. Fully porous coated devices employing distal fixation in the diaphysis emerged as the gold standard for revisions with several authors reporting greater than 90% success rate 8–10 years of follow-up. Surgical techniques and ease of insertion improved with the introduction of the extended trochanteric osteotomy as well as curved, long, fully porous coated stems with diameters up to 23mm. The limits of these stems were stretched to include any stem diameter in which even 1–2cm of diaphyseal contact could be achieved. When diaphyseal fixation was not possible (Type IV), the alternatives were either impaction grafting or
The technique involves impaction of cancellous bone into a cavitary femur. If segmental defects are present, the defects can be closed with stainless steel mesh. The technique requires retrograde fill of the femoral cavity with cancellous chips of appropriate size to create a new endomedullary canal. By using a set of trial impactors that are slightly larger than the real implants the cancellous bone is impacted into the tube. Subsequent proximal impaction of bone is performed with square tip or half moon impactors. A key part of the technique is to impact the bone tightly into the tube especially around the calcar to provide optimal stability. Finally a polished tapered stem is cemented using almost liquid cement in order to achieve interdigitation of the implant to the cancellous bone. The technique as described is rarely performed today in many centers around the world. In the US, the technique lost its interest because of the lengthy operative times, unacceptable rate of peri-operative and post-operative fractures and most importantly, owing to the success of tapered fluted modular stems. In centers such as Exeter where the technique was popularised, it is rarely performed today as well, as the primary cemented stems used there, rarely require revision. There is ample experience from around the globe, however, with the technique. Much has been learned about the best size and choice of cancellous graft, force of impaction, surface finish of the cemented stem, importance of stem length, and the limitations and complications of the technique. There are also good histology data that demonstrate successful vascularization and incorporation of the impacted cancellous bone chips and host bone. Our experience at the clinic was excellent with the technique as reported in CORR in 2003 by M Cabanela. The results at mid-term demonstrated minimal subsidence and good graft incorporation. Six of 54 hips, however, had a post-operative distal femoral fracture requiring ORIF. The use of longer cemented stems may decrease the risk of distal fracture and was subsequently reported by the author after reviewing a case series from Exeter. Today, I perform this technique once or twice per year. It is an option in the younger patient, where bone restoration is desired. Usually in a Paprosky Type IV femur, where a closed tube can be recreated and the proximal bone is reasonable. If the proximal bone is of poor quality, then I prefer to perform a transfemoral osteotomy, and perform an
Vancouver A: If minimal displacement and prosthesis stable can treat nonoperatively. If displacement is unacceptable and/or osteolysis is present consider surgery. AL: Rare, avulsions from osteopenia and lysis. If large, displaced and include large portion of calcar-can destabilise stem and prompt femoral revision. AG: More common. Often secondary to lysis. Does not usually affect implant stability. Minimal displacement. Treat closed × 3 months. Revise later is needed to remove the particle generator, debride defects and bone graft. Displaced with good host bone stock. Consider early ORIF and bone grafting. Vancouver B:. B1: Rarely non-operative. ORIF with femoral component retention. Need to carefully identify stem fixation. B2's classified as B1's are doomed to fail. B1's correctly identified treated with plate, allograft struts or both. High union rates with component retention. B2: Femoral revision +/− strut allograft. Best results seen with patients revised with uncemented, extensively porous coated femoral stems. May use modular, fluted taper stems. B3: Proximal femoral replacement - Tumor prosthesis,
We report the use of an
Introduction: The increasing utilization of total hip arthroplasty and the increasing life expectancy have brought an increasing incidence of revision hip arthroplasty. With severe acetabular, revision surgery with the use of standard cemented or press-fitted components is inadequate for fixation. In these cases the use of proximal femoral allograft can restore the deficiency. Purpose: To present a new technique and preliminary results of revision total hip arthroplasty using proximal femoral
Prevention: Many periprosthetic femur fractures may be prevented by: (1) good patient follow-up, (2) timely reoperation of lytic lesions if radiographs suggest fracture risk, and (3) prophylactic use of longer stemmed implants or strut grafts to bypass cortical defects at revision surgery. Treatment: Periprosthetic fractures can be treated using an algorithmic approach based on the Vancouver classification system. Fractures of greater or lesser trochanter (Type A). Nonoperative treatment if displacement acceptable and if not associated with lysis. Operative treatment if displacement unacceptable or associated with progressive lysis Fractures of distal femur well distal to implant (Type C). Treat as any other femur fracture, usually operatively. Fixation options: plate/retrograde nails Fractures around the implant or at its tips (Type B). These fractures almost always require surgery. Nonoperative treatment is associated with high rate of malunion, nonunion, poor results. Treatment is according to fixation status of implant and bone quality. Well-fixed stem (Type B1): ORIF with cable plate and/or strut grafts. Loose stem, reconstructable bone (Type B2): revise implant to long stem; usually use uncemented, distally fixed implant; occasionally long cemented stem (avoid cement extrusion). * Principles: obtain fracture stability, implant stability, and optimise conditions for bone healing (use bone grafts, don’t strip periosteum). Loose stem, unreconstructable proximal bone damage (Type B3): revise substituting for proximal femur with
Background: Massive bone loss from the proximal femur is a complex problem, occurring in multiple-revision hip arthroplasties, and malignancy.
The unacceptable failure rate of cemented femoral revisions led to many different cementless femoral designs employing fixation in the damaged proximal femur with biological coatings limited to this area. The results of these devices were uniformly poor and were abandoned for the most part by the mid 1990's. Fully porous coated devices employing distal fixation in the diaphysis emerged as the gold standard for revisions with several authors reporting greater than 90% success rate at 8–10 years of follow-up. Surgical techniques and ease of insertion improved with the introduction of the extended trochanteric osteotomy as well as curved, long, fully porous coated stems with diameters up to 23 mm. The limits of these stems were stretched to include any stem diameter in which even 1–2 cm of diaphyseal contact could be achieved. When diaphyseal fixation was not possible (Type IV), the alternatives were either impaction grafting or
The proximal humerus is the third most common site for primary sarcoma of bone. Since the 1970’s the treatment of primary bone sarcoma has changed from amputation to limb salvage. This has been due to advances in chemotherapy, imaging and surgical techniques. The literature has shown that the survival after limb salvage is similar to that of amputation. The optimum method of reconstruction of the shoulder remains controversial. The aim of our study was to review the cases of primary bone sarcoma of the proximal humerus treated at Middlemore Hospital. The New Zealand Bone Tumour Registry was searched for all lesions of the proximal humerus, with the diagnosis of chondrosarcoma, Ewing’s sarcoma or osteosarcoma. These records were reviewed for presentation status, biopsy, and type of reconstruct ion, chemotherapy, complications and recurrence. Outcomes measured in months of disease free survival and overall survival. The Bone Tumour Registry identified 29 patients who were treated at Middlemore Hospital with the primary diagnosis of Ewing’s sarcoma, chondrosarcoma or osteosarcoma of the proximal humerus. Results were available for 26 of the 29 patients (90% follow-up). Of these 29 patients six had chondrosarcoma, four Ewing’s sarcoma and 19 osteosarcoma. The patients with chondrosarcoma had an average age of 50 years. three patients were treated with endoprosthesis (mean survival 48 months) and one with vascularised fibula reconstruction (status 27 months ANED). Of the four patients with Ewing’s sarcoma, two had surgical reconstruction, one with intercalary allograft reconstruction (status 96 months ANED) and one with endoprosthesis (status 84 months ANED). The 19 patients with osteosarcoma had an average age 27 years, 15 patients were treated surgically. Three had endoprosthetic reconstruction (mean survival 29 months), two
Sarcoma is a malignancy of mesenchymal and neuroectodermal tissue, and as such, may arise in any location in the body. It is a rare tumour accounting for less than 1 in 1000 cancers and occurs with an incidence of 1.7–2 per 100000 head of population. Disease free survival following treatment of sarcoma has increased significantly over the last 20–30 years and five year survival for primary bone malignancies is approximately 75–80% and that for soft tissue sarcomas is approximately 70%. Early attempts at limb sparing surgery was characterised by surgery with narrow margins, complicated incisions and substantial soft tissue bruising. Not surprisingly, the risk of local recurrence was high, but this was attributed to the nature of sarcoma rather than technique, and amputation became the treatment of choice for sarcoma. In the mid 1970’s, the importance of surgical margins was recognised and guidelines were established for achieving oncologic surgical margins. Intralesional and marginal margins alone were regarded as inadequate, while wide and radical margins were acceptable for achieving local control of disease. The advent of magnetic resonance imaging improved the level of tumour delineation and allowed more accurate preoperative planning. This together with modern chemotherapy and radiotherapy increased the potential for limb sparing surgery. Reconstruction following tumour resection is an exciting opportunity to protect the function of the limb and the mobility and independence of the patient. There have been a variety of techniques described and these involve either biological, prosthetic or a combination of these options. Reconstructions may be mobile or rigid. Mobile reconstructions frequently utilise prosthetic joints, but at other times pseudarthroses may function similarly, e.g. hip, shoulder. Osteoarticular allografts are also used to maintain joint function following tumour resection. Prosthetic joints incorporate advances in articulation and fixation to improve longevity as many of these devices are implanted into younger patients than normally anticipated for arthroplasty, and these joints are thus, exposed to an increased risk of wear and loosening. Osteoarticular allografts are prone to degenerative changes as well as graft disintegration and infection.
The scapula is a rare site for a primary bone tumour. Only a small number of series have studied patient outcomes after treatment. Previous studies have shown a high rate of recurrence, with functional outcomes determined by the preservation of the glenohumeral joint and deltoid. The purpose of the current study was to report the outcome of patients who had undergone tumour resection that included the scapula. We reviewed 61 patients (37 male, 24 female; mean age 42 years (SD 19)) who had undergone resection of the scapula. The most common resection was type 2 (n = 34) according to the Tikhoff-Linberg classification, or type S1A (n = 35) on the Enneking classification.Aims
Methods
Hip reconstruction after resection of a periacetabular chondrosarcoma is complex and associated with a high rate of complications. Previous reports have compared no reconstruction with historical techniques that are no longer used. The aim of this study was to compare the results of tantalum acetabular reconstruction to both historical techniques and no reconstruction. We reviewed 66 patients (45 males and 21 females) with a mean age of 53 years (24 to 81) who had undergone acetabular resection for chondrosarcoma. A total of 36 patients (54%) underwent acetabular reconstruction, most commonly with a saddle prosthesis (n = 13; 36%) or a tantalum total hip arthroplasty (THA) (n = 10; 28%). Mean follow-up was nine years (SD 4).Aims
Methods
Porous metaphyseal cones can be used for fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and complex TKAs. This metaphyseal fixation has led to some surgeons using shorter cemented stems instead of diaphyseal engaging cementless stems with a potential benefit of ease of obtaining proper alignment without being beholden to the diaphysis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short term clinical and radiographic outcomes of a series of TKA cases performed using 3D-printed metaphyseal cones. A retrospective review of 86 rTKAs and nine complex primary TKAs, with an average age of 63.2 years (SD 8.2) and BMI of 34.0 kg/m2 (SD 8.7), in which metaphyseal cones were used for both femoral and tibial fixation were compared for their knee alignment based on the type of stem used. Overall, 22 knees had cementless stems on both sides, 52 had cemented stems on both sides, and 15 had mixed stems. Postoperative long-standing radiographs were evaluated for coronal and sagittal plane alignment. Adjusted logistic regression models were run to assess malalignment hip-knee-ankle (HKA) alignment beyond ± 3° and sagittal alignment of the tibial and femoral components ± 3° by stem type.Aims
Methods
Patients with a failed reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have limited salvage options. The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of revision RSA when used as a salvage procedure for a failed primary RSA. We reviewed all revision RSAs performed for a failed primary RSA between 2006 and 2012, excluding patients with a follow-up of less than two years. A total of 27 revision RSAs were included in the study. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (58 to 82). Of the 27 patients, 14 (52% were female). The mean follow-up was 4.4 years (2 to 10).Aims
Patients and Methods
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. 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).Aims
Patients and Methods
We describe a consecutive series of five patients with bone or soft-tissue sarcomas of the elbow and intra-articular extension treated by complex soft tissue, allograft bone and prosthetic joint replacement after wide extra-articular