Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XIV | Pages 34 - 34
1 Apr 2012
Lehner B Depeweg D Egermann M Raiss P
Full Access

Aim. The aim of this study was to analyze our results using a modular endoprosthetic replacement system (MUTARS) for bone tumours of the proximal humerus. Methods. Thirty-nine patients were treated with a MUTARS endoprosthesis of the proximal humerus. Mean follow-up was 38 months (3-138 months). Most operations were necessitated by metastasis (n=30); surgery for a primary tumour (n=9) was less frequent. The Enneking score and the active ranges of motion for shoulder flexion, abduction, and external rotation were recorded. Complete refixation of the rotator cuff was possible in 23 cases. Radiographs also were obtained. Results. Patient survival was 77% at 2 years and 45% at 11.5 years after surgery. The survival rate of the limb was 90% at 11.5 years. The mean Enneking score was 19 points (range 7-27 points). The mean shoulder flexion was 34 degrees (range 0-90 degrees), abduction 33 degrees (range 0-90 degrees), and external rotation 12 degrees (range 10-50 degrees). Patients with a complete rotator cuff repair showed a significant better range of motion compared to patients with a partial or no repair (p<0.015). No signs of implant loosening were observed on postoperative radiographs. Seven complications occurred, five of them leading to implant revision. At 11.5 years after surgery, the survival rate for the whole cohort without complications was 72%, without revision of the implant 70%. Conclusion. Replacement of the proximal humerus with MUTARS endoprosthesis is a viable treatment option for bone tumours with satisfying results


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 7 | Pages 982 - 988
1 Jul 2012
Puri A Gulia A Jambhekar N Laskar S

We analysed the outcome of patients with primary non-metastatic diaphyseal sarcomas who had en bloc resection with preservation of the adjoining joints and reconstruction with re-implantation of sterilised tumour bone after extracorporeal radiation (50 Gy). Between March 2005 and September 2009, 32 patients (16 Ewing’s sarcoma and 16 osteogenic sarcoma) with a mean age of 15 years (2 to 35) underwent this procedure. The femur was the most common site in 17 patients, followed by the tibia in 11, humerus in three and ulna in one. The mean resected length of bone was 19 cm (10 to 26). A total of 31 patients were available at a mean follow-up of 34 months (12 to 74). The mean time to union for all osteotomy sites was 7.3 months (3 to 28): metaphyseal osteotomy sites united quicker than diaphyseal osteotomy sites (5.8 months (3 to 10) versus 9.5 months (4 to 28)). There were three local recurrences, all in soft-tissue away from irradiated graft. At the time of final follow-up, 19 patients were free of disease, one was alive with disease and 11 had died of disease. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score for 29 patients evaluated at the last follow-up was 26 (9 to 30).

Extracorporeal irradiation is an oncologically safe and inexpensive technique for limb salvage in diaphyseal sarcomas and has good functional results.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 4 | Pages 534 - 539
1 Apr 2005
Cobb JP Ashwood N Robbins G Witt JD Unwin PS Blunn G

Massive endoprostheses using a cemented intramedullary stem are widely used to allow early resumption of activity after surgery for tumours. The survival of the prosthesis varies with the anatomical site, the type of prosthesis and the mode of fixation. Revision surgery is required in many cases because of aseptic loosening. Insertion of a second cemented endoprosthesis may be difficult because of the poor quality of the remaining bone, and loosening recurs quickly.

We describe a series of 14 patients with triplate fixation in difficult revision or joint-sparing tumour surgery with a minimum follow-up of four years. The triplate design incorporated well within a remodelled cortex to achieve osseomechanical integration with all patients regaining their original level of function within five months.

Our preliminary results suggest that this technique may provide an easy, biomechanically friendly alternative to insertion of a further device with an intramedullary stem, which has a shorter lifespan in revision or joint-sparing tumour surgery. A short segment of bone remaining after resection of a tumour will not accept an intramedullary stem, but may be soundly fixed using this method.