Cargando…
Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study
BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral replacement (PFR) is a technically demanding procedure commonly performed to restore extensive, oncological or non-oncological bone defects in a severely debilitated patient collective. Depending on different indications, a varying outcome has been reported. The aim of t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459543/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34551731 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04673-z |
_version_ | 1784571547954970624 |
---|---|
author | Toepfer, Andreas Straßer, Veit Ladurner, Andreas Calek, Anna-Katharina Potocnik, Primoz von Eisenhart-Rothe, Ruediger |
author_facet | Toepfer, Andreas Straßer, Veit Ladurner, Andreas Calek, Anna-Katharina Potocnik, Primoz von Eisenhart-Rothe, Ruediger |
author_sort | Toepfer, Andreas |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral replacement (PFR) is a technically demanding procedure commonly performed to restore extensive, oncological or non-oncological bone defects in a severely debilitated patient collective. Depending on different indications, a varying outcome has been reported. The aim of the study was to assess the functional outcomes and complication rates of PFR with the modular Munich-Luebeck (MML) femoral megaprosthesis (ESKA/Orthodynamics, Luebeck, Germany), and to highlight outcome differences in patients treated for failed revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) or malignant bone disease. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated with PFR for failed THA or malignant tumor disease between 2000 and 2012 was performed. Patient satisfaction, functional outcome (VAS, SF-12, MSTS, WOMAC, TESS), complications and failure types (Henderson’s failure classification) were assessed. A Kaplan-Meier analysis determined implant survival. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (age: 69.9 years, BMI: 26.7 kg/m(2), mean follow-up: 66 months) were included. The mean SF-12 (physical / mental) was 37.9 / 48.4. MSTS averaged 68% at final follow-up, while mean WOMAC and TESS scored 37.8 and 59.5. TESS and WOMAC scores demonstrated significantly worse outcomes in the revision group (RG) compared to the tumor group (TG). Overall complication rate was 43.1%, and dislocation was the most common complication (27.6%). Implant survival rates were 83% (RG) and 85% (TG; p = n.s.) at 5 years, while 10-year survival was 57% (RG) and 85% (TG, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PFR is a salvage procedure for restoration of mechanical integrity and limb preservation after extensive bone loss. Complications rates are considerably high. Functional outcomes and 10-year implant survival rate were worse in the RG compared to the TG. Strict indications and disease-specific patient education are essential in preoperative planning and prognosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8459543 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84595432021-09-23 Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study Toepfer, Andreas Straßer, Veit Ladurner, Andreas Calek, Anna-Katharina Potocnik, Primoz von Eisenhart-Rothe, Ruediger BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral replacement (PFR) is a technically demanding procedure commonly performed to restore extensive, oncological or non-oncological bone defects in a severely debilitated patient collective. Depending on different indications, a varying outcome has been reported. The aim of the study was to assess the functional outcomes and complication rates of PFR with the modular Munich-Luebeck (MML) femoral megaprosthesis (ESKA/Orthodynamics, Luebeck, Germany), and to highlight outcome differences in patients treated for failed revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) or malignant bone disease. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients treated with PFR for failed THA or malignant tumor disease between 2000 and 2012 was performed. Patient satisfaction, functional outcome (VAS, SF-12, MSTS, WOMAC, TESS), complications and failure types (Henderson’s failure classification) were assessed. A Kaplan-Meier analysis determined implant survival. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (age: 69.9 years, BMI: 26.7 kg/m(2), mean follow-up: 66 months) were included. The mean SF-12 (physical / mental) was 37.9 / 48.4. MSTS averaged 68% at final follow-up, while mean WOMAC and TESS scored 37.8 and 59.5. TESS and WOMAC scores demonstrated significantly worse outcomes in the revision group (RG) compared to the tumor group (TG). Overall complication rate was 43.1%, and dislocation was the most common complication (27.6%). Implant survival rates were 83% (RG) and 85% (TG; p = n.s.) at 5 years, while 10-year survival was 57% (RG) and 85% (TG, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PFR is a salvage procedure for restoration of mechanical integrity and limb preservation after extensive bone loss. Complications rates are considerably high. Functional outcomes and 10-year implant survival rate were worse in the RG compared to the TG. Strict indications and disease-specific patient education are essential in preoperative planning and prognosis. BioMed Central 2021-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8459543/ /pubmed/34551731 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04673-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Toepfer, Andreas Straßer, Veit Ladurner, Andreas Calek, Anna-Katharina Potocnik, Primoz von Eisenhart-Rothe, Ruediger Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title | Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title_full | Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title_fullStr | Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title_full_unstemmed | Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title_short | Different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
title_sort | different outcomes after proximal femoral replacement in oncologic and failed revision arthroplasty patients - a retrospective cohort study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459543/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34551731 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04673-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT toepferandreas differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy AT straßerveit differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy AT ladurnerandreas differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy AT calekannakatharina differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy AT potocnikprimoz differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy AT voneisenhartrotheruediger differentoutcomesafterproximalfemoralreplacementinoncologicandfailedrevisionarthroplastypatientsaretrospectivecohortstudy |