Literature DB >> 11937881

Two-stage revision for infected endoprostheses used in tumor surgery.

Robert J Grimer1, Mohan Belthur, C Chandrasekar, Simon R Carter, Roger M Tillman.   

Abstract

Thirty-four patients with infected massive endoprostheses had two-stage revision procedures to cure the infection and retain a useful functioning limb. An antibiotic impregnated cement spacer constructed with two cement gun liners and a Kuntscher nail provided temporary stability and also allowed a high dose of local antibiotic concentration. In three patients the infection never was controlled, and one of these patients had a successful second revision surgery. Six other patients had reinfection varying from 14 to 92 months after surgery. Risk factors for reinfection were previous radiotherapy and any additional operative intervention. The overall success rate for controlling infection was 91% at 1 year and 74% at 5 years. Six patients required amputation. The mean functional outcome for the retained limbs using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scoring system was 77%. Two-stage revisions seem almost as effective at controlling infection in massive endoprostheses as in conventional joint replacements, particularly if additional surgical interventions can be avoided.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11937881     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200202000-00022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  28 in total

Review 1.  Management of infection following reconstruction in bone tumors.

Authors:  Sudhir K Kapoor; Rajesh Thiyam
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2015-07-07

2.  Early distal femoral endoprosthetic survival: cemented stems versus the Compress implant.

Authors:  A A Bhangu; M J Kramer; R J Grimer; R J O'Donnell
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-09-16       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  [Proximal and total femur replacement].

Authors:  P H Pennekamp; D C Wirtz; H R Dürr
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.154

Review 4.  [Revision of tumour endoprostheses around the knee joint. Review and own results].

Authors:  R Windhager; A Leithner; M Hochegger
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 5.  [Management of complications in megaprostheses].

Authors:  J Hardes; H Ahrens; G Gosheger; M Nottrott; R Dieckmann; M-P Henrichs; A Streitbürger
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.000

6.  Distal femur reconstruction with modular tumour prostheses: a single Institution analysis of implant survival comparing fixed versus rotating hinge knee prostheses.

Authors:  Elisa Pala; Giulia Trovarelli; Andrea Angelini; Pietro Ruggieri
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-06-04       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  [Management of complications following resection and defect reconstruction of tumors near the hip joint].

Authors:  K-D Schaser; I Melcher; S Märdian; C Perka; R Locher; P Schwabe
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  [Infection management of megaimplants].

Authors:  R Ascherl
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 9.  Infection and tissue engineering in segmental bone defects--a mini review.

Authors:  Manitha B Nair; James D Kretlow; Antonios G Mikos; F Kurtis Kasper
Journal:  Curr Opin Biotechnol       Date:  2011-02-25       Impact factor: 9.740

10.  Treatment solutions are unclear for perimegaprosthetic infections.

Authors:  Lisa B Ercolano; Tyson Christensen; Richard McGough; Kurt Weiss
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.