Endoprosthetic and allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction of the proximal femur for bone neoplasms

被引:106
作者
Farid, Yasser
Lin, Patrick P.
Lewis, Valerae O.
Yasko, Alan W.
机构
[1] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Oncol, Unit 444, Houston, TX 77230 USA
[2] Cairo Univ Hosp, Ctr Preservat & Transplantat Musculoskeletal Tiss, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.blo.0000181491.39048.fe
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Reconstruction of the proximal femur after tumor resection can be achieved with either an endoprosthesis or an allograft-prosthetic composite. We compared the two modalities for complications, functional outcome, and construct survival. We retrospectively analyzed 52 patients with endoprostheses and 20 with allograft-prosthetic composite reconstructions between 1974 and 2002. Median followup was 146 months and 76 months, respectively. Both methods were associated with low rates of early complications. Infections occurred in two patients with endoprostheses and one patient with an allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction. Aseptic loosening was the most common (10%) late complication for patients with endoprostheses. Nonunion was the most common (10%) complication for patients with allograft-prosthetic composite reconstructions. All host-allograft junctions eventually healed after bone-grafting. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores were similar for patients with endoprostheses (70%) and allograft-prosthetic composites (82%). The median hip abductor strength was greater for patients with allograft-prosthetic composite reconstructions (4.6 of 5) than for patients with endoprostheses (2.8 of 5). Kaplan-Meier survivorship of the implant was 86% for both groups at 10 years. The consistent restoration of abductor muscle strength combined with the low morbidity and high durability support the use of allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction in patients with long life expectancy.
引用
收藏
页码:223 / 229
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]
Bickels J, 2000, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P218
[2]
Clarke HD, 1998, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P222
[3]
ENDOPROSTHETIC REPLACEMENT OF THE PROXIMAL FEMUR AND ACETABULUM - A SURVIVAL ANALYSIS [J].
DOBBS, HS ;
SCALES, JT ;
WILSON, JN ;
KEMP, HBS ;
BURROWS, HJ ;
SNEATH, RS .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1981, 63 (02) :219-224
[4]
Donati D, 2002, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P192
[5]
ENNEKING WF, 1993, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P241
[6]
Fox EJ, 2002, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P106
[7]
Function of reinserted abductor muscles after femoral replacement [J].
Giurea, A ;
Paternostro, T ;
Heinz-Peer, G ;
Kaider, A ;
Gottsauner-Wolf, F .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1998, 80B (02) :284-287
[8]
TENDONS ATTACHED TO PROSTHESES BY TENDON BONE BLOCK FIXATION - AN EXPERIMENTAL-STUDY IN DOGS [J].
GOTTSAUNERWOLF, F ;
EGGER, EL ;
SCHULTZ, FM ;
SIM, FH ;
CHAO, EYS .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC RESEARCH, 1994, 12 (06) :814-821
[9]
Hejna MJ, 1997, SEMIN SURG ONCOL, V13, P18, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2388(199701/02)13:1<18::AID-SSU4>3.0.CO
[10]
2-7