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. This is a retrospective review of 233 patients who underwent PFEPR. The mean age was 54.7 years (SD 18.2), and 99 (42.5%) were male. There were 90 patients with primary bone tumours (38.6%), 122 with metastatic bone disease (52.4%), and 21 with haematological malignancy (9.0%). A total of 128 patients had monopolar (54.9%), 74 had bipolar hemiarthroplasty heads (31.8%), and 31 underwent acetabular arthroplasty (13.3%).Aims
Methods
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). In all, 81 patients treated with TFEPR from 1976 to 2017 were retrospectively evaluated and failures were categorized according to the Henderson classification. There were 38 female patients (47%) and 43 male patients (53%) with a mean age at diagnosis of 43 years (12 to 86). The mean follow-up time was 10.3 years (0 to 31.7). A survival analysis was performed followed by univariate and multivariate Cox regression to identify independent implant survival factors.Aims
Patients and Methods
We evaluated the clinical results and complications
after extra-articular resection of the distal femur and/or proximal
tibia and reconstruction with a tumour endoprosthesis (MUTARS) in
59 patients (mean age 33 years (11 to 74)) with malignant bone or
soft-tissue tumours. According to a Kaplan–Meier analysis, limb
survival was 76% (95% confidence interval (CI) 64.1 to 88.5) after
a mean follow-up of 4.7 years (one month to 17 years). Peri-prosthetic infection
was the most common indication for subsequent amputation (eight
patients). Survival of the prosthesis without revision was 48% (95%
CI 34.8 to 62.0) at two years and 25% (95% CI 11.1 to 39.9) at five years
post-operatively. Failure of the prosthesis was due to deep infection
in 22 patients (37%), aseptic loosening in ten patients (17%), and
peri-prosthetic fracture in six patients (10%). Wear of the bearings
made a minor revision necessary in 12 patients (20%). The mean Musculoskeletal
Tumor Society score was 23 (10 to 29). An extensor lag >
10° was
noted in ten patients (17%). These results suggest that limb salvage after extra-articular
resection with a tumour prosthesis can achieve good functional results
in most patients, although the rates of complications and subsequent
amputation are higher than in patients treated with intra-articular
resection. Cite this article:
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 undertook a cemental unipolar proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacement in 131 patients with a mean age of 50 years (2 to 84). Primary malignant tumours were present in 54 patients and 67 had metastatic disease. In addition, eight patients had either lymphoma or myeloma and two had non-oncological disorders. The mean follow-up was 27 months (0 to 180). An acetabular revision was required later in 14 patients, 12 of whom had been under the age of 21 years at the time of insertion of their original prosthesis. The risk of acetabular revision in patients over 21 years of age was 8% at five years compared with 36% in those aged under 21 years. All the unipolar hips in this younger age group required revision within 11 years of the initial operation. We conclude that unipolar replacement should not be used in younger patients and should be avoided in patients with a life expectancy of more than five years.
We treated 98 patients with peri-acetabular tumours by resection and reconstruction with a custom-made pelvic endoprosthesis. The overall survival of the patients was 67% at five years, 54% at ten years and 51% at 30 years. One or more complications occurred in 58.1% of patients (54), of which infection was the most common, affecting 30% (28 patients). The rate of local recurrence was 31% (29 patients) after a mean follow-up of 71 months (11 to 147). Dislocation occurred in 20% of patients (19). Before 1996 the rate was 40.5% (17 patients) but this was reduced to 3.9% (two patients) with the introduction of a larger femoral head. There were six cases of palsy of the femoral nerve with recovery in only two. Revision or excision arthroplasty was performed in 23.7% of patients (22), principally for uncontrolled infection or aseptic loosening. Higher rates of death, infection and revision occurred in men. This method of treatment is still associated with high morbidity. Patients should be carefully selected and informed of this pre-operatively.
