Cargando…

Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint

BACKGROUND: Among 40 patients with primary malignant tumors of the knee joint who underwent reconstruction of the affected limb with tumor prosthesis, revision was required in 7 due to stem breakage or loosening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In the 7 cases undergoing revision, conditions and background fac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yoshida, Yukihiro, Osaka, Shunzo, Kojima, Toshio, Taniguchi, Masafumi, Osaka, Eiji, Tokuhashi, Yasuaki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3376781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22754428
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-011-0848-0
_version_ 1782235868062285824
author Yoshida, Yukihiro
Osaka, Shunzo
Kojima, Toshio
Taniguchi, Masafumi
Osaka, Eiji
Tokuhashi, Yasuaki
author_facet Yoshida, Yukihiro
Osaka, Shunzo
Kojima, Toshio
Taniguchi, Masafumi
Osaka, Eiji
Tokuhashi, Yasuaki
author_sort Yoshida, Yukihiro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Among 40 patients with primary malignant tumors of the knee joint who underwent reconstruction of the affected limb with tumor prosthesis, revision was required in 7 due to stem breakage or loosening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In the 7 cases undergoing revision, conditions and background factors at the time of breakage, the breakage site, time of revision, models of previous and new prostheses, stem diameters before and after revision, details of the revision (blood loss, operative time), and the presence or absence of adjuvant therapy were determined. RESULTS: The replacement site was the distal femur in 5 and proximal tibia in 2. Revision was performed 6 years and 2 months after the previous prosthesis placement on average. The broken prosthesis model was KMFTR in 4 and HMRS and the physio-hinge type in one each. Revision due to loosening was performed in a case requiring replacement with Growing Kotz prosthesis. The model was switched to HMRS in 3, and the stem diameter was changed to 12 mm in 3 KMFTR breakage cases. The mean stem diameters were 11.2 and 10.2 mm in the non-revision and revision groups. The respective resection rates were 36 and 45%. The mean functional evaluation was 70.1% before and 76.2% after revision. CONCLUSION: To reduce the risk of tumor prosthesis breakage, the amount of bone resection should be limited to 30% or less in the affected bone, the stem diameter should be at least 12 mm, and the stem shape should be fitted to the anatomical shape of the femur.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3376781
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33767812012-06-27 Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint Yoshida, Yukihiro Osaka, Shunzo Kojima, Toshio Taniguchi, Masafumi Osaka, Eiji Tokuhashi, Yasuaki Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Original Article BACKGROUND: Among 40 patients with primary malignant tumors of the knee joint who underwent reconstruction of the affected limb with tumor prosthesis, revision was required in 7 due to stem breakage or loosening. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In the 7 cases undergoing revision, conditions and background factors at the time of breakage, the breakage site, time of revision, models of previous and new prostheses, stem diameters before and after revision, details of the revision (blood loss, operative time), and the presence or absence of adjuvant therapy were determined. RESULTS: The replacement site was the distal femur in 5 and proximal tibia in 2. Revision was performed 6 years and 2 months after the previous prosthesis placement on average. The broken prosthesis model was KMFTR in 4 and HMRS and the physio-hinge type in one each. Revision due to loosening was performed in a case requiring replacement with Growing Kotz prosthesis. The model was switched to HMRS in 3, and the stem diameter was changed to 12 mm in 3 KMFTR breakage cases. The mean stem diameters were 11.2 and 10.2 mm in the non-revision and revision groups. The respective resection rates were 36 and 45%. The mean functional evaluation was 70.1% before and 76.2% after revision. CONCLUSION: To reduce the risk of tumor prosthesis breakage, the amount of bone resection should be limited to 30% or less in the affected bone, the stem diameter should be at least 12 mm, and the stem shape should be fitted to the anatomical shape of the femur. Springer-Verlag 2011-08-19 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3376781/ /pubmed/22754428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-011-0848-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Yoshida, Yukihiro
Osaka, Shunzo
Kojima, Toshio
Taniguchi, Masafumi
Osaka, Eiji
Tokuhashi, Yasuaki
Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title_full Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title_fullStr Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title_full_unstemmed Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title_short Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
title_sort revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3376781/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22754428
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-011-0848-0
work_keys_str_mv AT yoshidayukihiro revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint
AT osakashunzo revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint
AT kojimatoshio revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint
AT taniguchimasafumi revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint
AT osakaeiji revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint
AT tokuhashiyasuaki revisionoftumorprosthesisofthekneejoint