Literature DB >> 16326880

Surgical treatment of skeletal metastatic lesions of the proximal femur: endoprosthesis or reconstruction nail?

R Wedin1, H C F Bauer.   

Abstract

We report positive and negative factors associated with the most commonly-used methods of reconstruction after pathological fracture of the proximal femur. The study was based on 142 patients treated surgically for 146 metastatic lesions between 1996 and 2003. The local rate of failure was 10.3% (15 of 146). Of 37 operations involving osteosynthetic devices, six failed (16.2%) compared with nine (8.3%) in 109 operations involving endoprostheses. Of nine cases of prosthetic failure, four were due to periprosthetic fractures and three to recurrent dislocation. In the osteosynthesis group, three (13.6%) of 22 reconstruction nails failed. The two-year risk of re-operation after any type of osteosynthesis was 0.35 compared with 0.18 after any type of endoprosthetic reconstruction (p = 0.07). Endoprosthetic reconstructions are preferable to the use of reconstruction nails and other osteosynthetic devices for the treatment of metastatic lesions in the proximal third of the femur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16326880     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B12.16629

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  71 in total

1.  Case series of patients with pathological dyaphiseal fractures from metastatic bone disease.

Authors:  Dinu Vermesan; Radu Prejbeanu; Horia Haragus; Alis Dema; Manuel D Oprea; Diana Andrei; Dan V Poenaru; Marius Niculescu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Treatment results of pathological fractures of the long bones: a retrospective analysis of 88 patients.

Authors:  Kambiz Sarahrudi; Katherina Hora; Thomas Heinz; Steven Millington; Vilmos Vécsei
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Metastatic disease of the long bones: a review of the health care burden in a major trauma centre.

Authors:  Michael Kelly; Mitchell Lee; Paul Clarkson; Peter J O'Brien
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.089

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

Authors:  Joel R Peterson; Alexander P Decilveo; Ian T O'Connor; Ivan Golub; James C Wittig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Benefits of early intramedullary nailing in femoral metastases.

Authors:  Camilla Arvinius; Juan Luis Cebrián Parra; Laura Serrano Mateo; Roberto García Maroto; Alberto Francés Borrego; Luis López-Durán Stern
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  What Factors Are Associated With Implant Breakage and Revision After Intramedullary Nailing for Femoral Metastases?

Authors:  Julie J Willeumier; Mustafa Kaynak; Peer van der Zwaal; Sven A G Meylaerts; Nina M C Mathijssen; Paul C Jutte; Panagiotis Tsagozis; Rikard Wedin; Michiel A J van de Sande; Marta Fiocco; P D Sander Dijkstra
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Surgical management of metastatic lesions of the proximal femur with pathological fractures using intramedullary nailing or endoprosthetic replacement.

Authors:  Zeping Yu; Yan Xiong; Rui Shi; Li Min; Wenli Zhang; Hongyuan Liu; Xiang Fang; Chongqi Tu; Hong Duan
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-11-15

8.  [Surgical treatment of pathologic fractures of the humerus and femur].

Authors:  G Gruber; M Zacherl; A Leithner; C Giessauf; M Glehr; H Clar; R Windhager
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.087

9.  Trends in the surgical treatment of pathologic proximal femur fractures among Musculoskeletal Tumor Society members.

Authors:  Matthew Steensma; John H Healey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Survival of massive allografts in segmental oncological bone defect reconstructions.

Authors:  P H J Bullens; N M Minderhoud; M C de Waal Malefijt; R P H Veth; P Buma; H W B Schreuder
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.