Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR · 2020
Survival and complications in hinged knee reconstruction prostheses after distal femoral or proximal tibial tumor resection: A retrospective study of 161 cases.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mazaleyrat Matthieu, Le Nail Louis-Romée, Auberger Guillaume, Biau David, Rosset Philippe, Waast Denis, Gouin François, Bonnevialle Paul, Ehlinger Matthieu, Pasquier Gilles, Vaz Gualter, French Society of Orthopedic Surgery, Traumatology (SoFCOT)
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Hinged knee megaprostheses are mainly used for reconstruction after tumor resection. They may incur complications, but this has not been assessed in the French literature, except in small series at short follow-up. We therefore conducted a large-scale nationwide multicenter retrospective study with a minimum 5 years' follow-up. The objectives were (1) to compare survival between distal femoral and proximal tibial reconstruction prostheses, and (2) to analyze complications and failure.
HYPOTHESIS: Distal femoral hinged reconstruction prostheses show longer survival with fewer complications than proximal tibial prostheses.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-one patients were included: 118 in the distal femoral group, and 43 in the proximal tibial group. Tumors were mostly osteosarcomas (90 cases) or chondrosarcomas (31 cases). Mean age was 37 years (range, 12-86 years). Complications were assessed on the Henderson classification. Failure was defined by prosthesis anchor exchange or amputation.
RESULTS: At a mean 9 years' follow-up (range, 5-23 years), implant survival was longer in the distal femoral group: 5- and 10-year survival, 84% [95% CI, 75-89] and 70% [95% CI, 59-79] versus 74% [95% CI, 69-85] and 43% [95% CI, 23-61] (p=0.02). Revision surgery for complications mainly concerned aseptic loosening (19%, 30 cases) or deep infection (16%, 25 cases) and more often involved the proximal tibia (65% vs. 43%, 28 vs. 51 cases; OR 2.4 [95% CI, 1.2-5.1]; p=0.02).
DISCUSSION: Hinged knee reconstruction prosthesis is a solution in tumoral pathology, but with a high risk of complications (loosening and infection) and a higher failure rate in the proximal tibial reconstruction prosthesis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.
HYPOTHESIS: Distal femoral hinged reconstruction prostheses show longer survival with fewer complications than proximal tibial prostheses.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-one patients were included: 118 in the distal femoral group, and 43 in the proximal tibial group. Tumors were mostly osteosarcomas (90 cases) or chondrosarcomas (31 cases). Mean age was 37 years (range, 12-86 years). Complications were assessed on the Henderson classification. Failure was defined by prosthesis anchor exchange or amputation.
RESULTS: At a mean 9 years' follow-up (range, 5-23 years), implant survival was longer in the distal femoral group: 5- and 10-year survival, 84% [95% CI, 75-89] and 70% [95% CI, 59-79] versus 74% [95% CI, 69-85] and 43% [95% CI, 23-61] (p=0.02). Revision surgery for complications mainly concerned aseptic loosening (19%, 30 cases) or deep infection (16%, 25 cases) and more often involved the proximal tibia (65% vs. 43%, 28 vs. 51 cases; OR 2.4 [95% CI, 1.2-5.1]; p=0.02).
DISCUSSION: Hinged knee reconstruction prosthesis is a solution in tumoral pathology, but with a high risk of complications (loosening and infection) and a higher failure rate in the proximal tibial reconstruction prosthesis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, case series.