Cargando…

A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report

INTRODUCTION: Mega prosthesis is mainly used for the treatment of the oncologic patient whose limb underwent salvage surgery that caused the limb to lose significant bone or soft tissue. In recent years, mega prosthesis can also be used to treat non-oncologic patients. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We prese...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prabowo, Yogi, Ramang, Didi Saputra, Farqani, Syahdi, Arya Mahendra Karda, I Wayan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7486417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32953102
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2020.08.036
_version_ 1783581331699007488
author Prabowo, Yogi
Ramang, Didi Saputra
Farqani, Syahdi
Arya Mahendra Karda, I Wayan
author_facet Prabowo, Yogi
Ramang, Didi Saputra
Farqani, Syahdi
Arya Mahendra Karda, I Wayan
author_sort Prabowo, Yogi
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Mega prosthesis is mainly used for the treatment of the oncologic patient whose limb underwent salvage surgery that caused the limb to lose significant bone or soft tissue. In recent years, mega prosthesis can also be used to treat non-oncologic patients. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We presented a case of a 40-year-old male with chief complain of pain on the right knee 5 months before admission. Four years previously, the patient sustained motor vehicle accident that fractured his head of femur dan distal femur. He underwent 2-staged surgery for his femoral head and distal femur. However, he presented a year later with signs of non-union and finally underwent mega prosthesis surgery on his distal femur. During his follow up, he experienced a fracture on his prosthesis 3 years later and was referred to our institution. Physical examination shows deformity and slight varus on the right knee, and limited range of motion. The patient then underwent implant revisions. DISCUSSION: After 12 months of post revision surgery follow-up, the patient was able to walk independently. Our patient has not had any sign or episode of failure after the follow up for 12 months. According to literature, the incidence of failure is mostly at 48–72 months post implantation. CONCLUSION: The problem for this patient maybe caused by the mechanical fatigue of the implant due to stress addressed to the implant. Our current technique of revisions procedure hopefully will enhance the power of the mega prosthesis for further usage.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7486417
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74864172020-09-17 A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report Prabowo, Yogi Ramang, Didi Saputra Farqani, Syahdi Arya Mahendra Karda, I Wayan Ann Med Surg (Lond) Case Report INTRODUCTION: Mega prosthesis is mainly used for the treatment of the oncologic patient whose limb underwent salvage surgery that caused the limb to lose significant bone or soft tissue. In recent years, mega prosthesis can also be used to treat non-oncologic patients. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We presented a case of a 40-year-old male with chief complain of pain on the right knee 5 months before admission. Four years previously, the patient sustained motor vehicle accident that fractured his head of femur dan distal femur. He underwent 2-staged surgery for his femoral head and distal femur. However, he presented a year later with signs of non-union and finally underwent mega prosthesis surgery on his distal femur. During his follow up, he experienced a fracture on his prosthesis 3 years later and was referred to our institution. Physical examination shows deformity and slight varus on the right knee, and limited range of motion. The patient then underwent implant revisions. DISCUSSION: After 12 months of post revision surgery follow-up, the patient was able to walk independently. Our patient has not had any sign or episode of failure after the follow up for 12 months. According to literature, the incidence of failure is mostly at 48–72 months post implantation. CONCLUSION: The problem for this patient maybe caused by the mechanical fatigue of the implant due to stress addressed to the implant. Our current technique of revisions procedure hopefully will enhance the power of the mega prosthesis for further usage. Elsevier 2020-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7486417/ /pubmed/32953102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2020.08.036 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IJS Publishing Group Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Case Report
Prabowo, Yogi
Ramang, Didi Saputra
Farqani, Syahdi
Arya Mahendra Karda, I Wayan
A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title_full A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title_fullStr A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title_full_unstemmed A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title_short A modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: Case report
title_sort modified technique of mega prosthesis revision on non-neoplastic patient: case report
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7486417/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32953102
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2020.08.036
work_keys_str_mv AT prabowoyogi amodifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT ramangdidisaputra amodifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT farqanisyahdi amodifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT aryamahendrakardaiwayan amodifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT prabowoyogi modifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT ramangdidisaputra modifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT farqanisyahdi modifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport
AT aryamahendrakardaiwayan modifiedtechniqueofmegaprosthesisrevisiononnonneoplasticpatientcasereport