Survival of current production tumor endoprostheses: Complications, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis

Background Traditional treatments for pathological fractures of the proximal femur resulting from metastatic bone disease include fixation with intramedullary nailing supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate, osteosynthesis with a plate-screw construct and polymethylmethacrylate, or endoprosthetic reconstruction. Despite the frequent practice of these treatments, treatment outcomes have not been rigorously compared. In addition, very few studies examine specific approaches to endoprosthetic reconstruction such as long stem hemiarthroplasty.Questions/purposes This study examines survival, functional outcomes, and complications associated with long stem hemiarthroplasty in a small group of patients treated for impending and actual pathologic fractures of the proximal femur resulting from metastatic bone disease. Methods Between 2012 and 2015, 21 patients were treated with long stem cemented hemiarthroplasty in 22 limbs. During that time, indications for this approach included lesions from metastases, myeloma, or lymphoma involving the proximal femur that resulted in an impending or actual pathological fracture. An impending fracture was classified as a painful lesion with at least 50% cortical erosion. During the study period, six patients with proximal femoral metastases not deemed to meet these indications were treated with other surgical approaches such as intramedullary nailing supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate and osteosynthesis with a plate-screw construct and polymethylmethacrylate. Mortality was tracked through medical records and phone calls to the patients and their families. Followup for the entire group of patients (n = 22) ranged from 1 to 27 months with a mean duration of 11 months. For patients with at least 1 year of followup (n = 11), the mean duration was 18 months (range, 12-27 months) and for patients with less than 1 year of followup (n = 11), the mean duration was 3 months (range, 1-11 months). Functional outcomes were evaluated according to the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system for lower extremities, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Scale of Performance Status, and the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) Index. Scores and complications were determined by direct patient examination, retrospective chart review, review of a longitudinally maintained institutional database, and followup phone calls. Results Ten patients died of disease within the followup period. Before surgery, the median total MSTS score for the entire group of patients (n = 22) was 4.5 (range, 0-23), Each author certifies that he or she, or a member of his or her immediate family, has no funding or commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research1 editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. Clinical O...

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Are the Functional Results and Complications With Long Stem Hemiarthroplasty in Patients With Metastases to the Proximal Femur?

Peterson

Decilveo

O'Connor

et al. 2017

“…Prosthetic replacement with modular implants has become the most common reconstructive technique of bone loss of the lower limb after tumor resection [1,16,17,25,26,31,33,34]. The same modular systems may be used to restore osteoarticular defects of the hip and knee in prosthetic revision surgery and posttraumatic situations [6,14,32].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Was the Survival of Megaprostheses in Lower Limb Reconstructions After Tumor Resections?

Capanna

Scoccianti

Frenos

et al. 2015

133

Background Prosthetic replacement is the most commonly used option for reconstruction of osteoarticular bone loss resulting from bone neoplasm resection or prosthetic failure. Starting in late 2001, we began exclusively using a single system for large-segment osteoarticular reconstruction after tumor resection; to our knowledge, there are no published series from one center evaluating the use of this implant.

“…Severe femoral bone deficiency after fracture or loosening of a prior stem traditionally results in revision to a cemented or largediameter press-fit stemmed implant, an allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) reconstruction, or a total femur replacement [7,23,26,33]. Unfortunately, short residual proximal femur segments cannot be addressed by these options and these constructs have high failure rates, often exceeding 30% at 5 years [20,22,23,26,29,33]. We need to improve our current strategies to preserve or reconstitute the remaining femoral bone stock while creating a more durable revision construct.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revision Distal Femoral Arthroplasty With the Compress® Prosthesis Has a Low Rate of Mechanical Failure at 10 Years

Zimel

Farfalli

Zindman

et al. 2016

Background Patients with failed distal femoral megaprostheses often have bone loss that limits reconstructive options and contributes to the high failure rate of revision surgery. The Compress 1 Compliant Pre-stress (CPS) implant can reconstruct the femur even when there is little remaining bone. It differs from traditional stemmed prostheses because it requires only 4 to 8 cm of residual bone for fixation. Given the poor long-term results of stemmed revision constructs, we sought to determine the failure rate and functional outcomes of the CPS implant in revision surgery. Questions/purposes (1) What is the cumulative incidence of mechanical and other types of implant failure when used to revise failed distal femoral arthroplasties placed after oncologic resection? (2) What complications are characteristic of this prosthesis? (3) What function do patients achieve after receiving this prosthesis? Methods We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who experienced failure of a distal femoral prosthesis and were revised to a CPS implant from April 2000 to February 2013. Indications for use included a minimum 2.5 mm cortical thickness of the remaining proximal femur, no prior radiation, life expectancy [10 years, and compliance with protected weightbearing for 3 months. The cumulative incidence of failure was calculated for both mechanical (loss of compression between the implant anchor plug and spindle) and other failure modes using a competing risk analysis. Failure was defined as removal of the CPS implant. Followup was a minimum of 2 years or until implant removal. Median followup for patients with [CI], 4%-33%) at both 5 and 10 years. These failures occurred early at a median of 5 months. The cumulative incidence of other failures was 18% (95% CI, 7%-45%) at 5 and 10 years, all of which were deep infection. Three patients required secondary operations for cortical insufficiency proximal to the anchor plug in bone not spanned by the CPS implant and unrelated to the prosthesis. Median MSTS score was 27 (range, 24-30). Conclusions Revision distal femoral replacement arthroplasty after a failed megaprosthesis is often difficult as a result of a lack of adequate bone. Reconstruction with the CPS implant has an 11% failure rate at 10 years. Our results are promising and demonstrate the durable fixation provided by the CPS implant. Further studies to compare the CPS prosthesis and other reconstruction options with respect to survival and functional outcomes are warranted. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic study.