Cargando…

Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?

PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the proximal femur after tumour resection can be performed with proximal femoral endopros-theses (PFE). Many studies have reported that bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) reduce the risk of dislocation after oncological resections. However, progressive cotyloiditis which might...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zucchini, Riccardo, Sambri, Andrea, Fiore, Michele, Giannini, Claudio, Donati, Davide Maria, De Paolis, Massimiliano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Hip Society 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34552892
http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2021.33.3.147
_version_ 1783752648042741760
author Zucchini, Riccardo
Sambri, Andrea
Fiore, Michele
Giannini, Claudio
Donati, Davide Maria
De Paolis, Massimiliano
author_facet Zucchini, Riccardo
Sambri, Andrea
Fiore, Michele
Giannini, Claudio
Donati, Davide Maria
De Paolis, Massimiliano
author_sort Zucchini, Riccardo
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the proximal femur after tumour resection can be performed with proximal femoral endopros-theses (PFE). Many studies have reported that bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) reduce the risk of dislocation after oncological resections. However, progressive cotyloiditis which might require acetabular resurfacing (total hip arthroplasty [THA]) has been reported. The aim of this study is to compare the results of BHA and THA after proximal femur resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 104 consecutive patients affected by primary (n=52) and metastatic (n=52) bone tumours were included. Ninety patients underwent BHA and 14 patients underwent THA. Complications were recorded and classified according to the Henderson classification. At final follow-up, patients with the implant in site were functionally evaluated with modified Harris hip score (HHS). RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 50 months (range, 2–171 months). Twenty-four (23.1%) patients developed major complications. Eleven (12.2%) BHA required acetabular resurfacing. Patients affected by primary bone tumours showed an increased risk of THA conversion (P=0.042). A reduced risk was observed in patients younger than 35 years (P=0.043) and in those older than 65 years (P=0.033). Dislocation occurred in four case (3.8%), in particular after THA (P=0.021). At final follow-up, 93 patients had the prosthesis in site (80 BHA and 13 THA). Mean postoperative HHS was 70 (range, 30–90). CONCLUSION: The risk of dislocation is lower for bipolar endoprosthesis compared to THA. However cotyloiditis and acetabular resurfacing might occurred.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8440131
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Korean Hip Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84401312021-09-21 Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup? Zucchini, Riccardo Sambri, Andrea Fiore, Michele Giannini, Claudio Donati, Davide Maria De Paolis, Massimiliano Hip Pelvis Original Article PURPOSE: Reconstruction of the proximal femur after tumour resection can be performed with proximal femoral endopros-theses (PFE). Many studies have reported that bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) reduce the risk of dislocation after oncological resections. However, progressive cotyloiditis which might require acetabular resurfacing (total hip arthroplasty [THA]) has been reported. The aim of this study is to compare the results of BHA and THA after proximal femur resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 104 consecutive patients affected by primary (n=52) and metastatic (n=52) bone tumours were included. Ninety patients underwent BHA and 14 patients underwent THA. Complications were recorded and classified according to the Henderson classification. At final follow-up, patients with the implant in site were functionally evaluated with modified Harris hip score (HHS). RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 50 months (range, 2–171 months). Twenty-four (23.1%) patients developed major complications. Eleven (12.2%) BHA required acetabular resurfacing. Patients affected by primary bone tumours showed an increased risk of THA conversion (P=0.042). A reduced risk was observed in patients younger than 35 years (P=0.043) and in those older than 65 years (P=0.033). Dislocation occurred in four case (3.8%), in particular after THA (P=0.021). At final follow-up, 93 patients had the prosthesis in site (80 BHA and 13 THA). Mean postoperative HHS was 70 (range, 30–90). CONCLUSION: The risk of dislocation is lower for bipolar endoprosthesis compared to THA. However cotyloiditis and acetabular resurfacing might occurred. Korean Hip Society 2021-09 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8440131/ /pubmed/34552892 http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2021.33.3.147 Text en Copyright © 2021 by Korean Hip Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Zucchini, Riccardo
Sambri, Andrea
Fiore, Michele
Giannini, Claudio
Donati, Davide Maria
De Paolis, Massimiliano
Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title_full Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title_fullStr Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title_full_unstemmed Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title_short Megaprosthesis Reconstruction of the Proximal Femur following Bone Tumour Resection: When Do We Need the Cup?
title_sort megaprosthesis reconstruction of the proximal femur following bone tumour resection: when do we need the cup?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8440131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34552892
http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2021.33.3.147
work_keys_str_mv AT zucchiniriccardo megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup
AT sambriandrea megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup
AT fioremichele megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup
AT gianniniclaudio megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup
AT donatidavidemaria megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup
AT depaolismassimiliano megaprosthesisreconstructionoftheproximalfemurfollowingbonetumourresectionwhendoweneedthecup