Literature DB >> 20183746

[Proximal femur replacement in revision arthroplasty].

J Hardes1, T Budny, G Hauschild, M Balke, A Streitbürger, R Dieckmann, G Gosheger, H Ahrens.   

Abstract

AIM: Today, megaendoprostheses--which were originally designed for osseous defect reconstructions in tumour surgery--are being more frequently used for extensive bone defects in revision arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to assess the complication rate and the functional results associated with megaendoprosthesis reconstruction of the proximal femur in a non-oncological patient group.
METHOD: 28 patients (average age 72; SD 10 years) with a proximal femur replacement were retrospectively (mean follow-up 43 months) evaluated regarding the complication rate. The Harris hip score was used to assess the outcome. The revision surgery was indicated because of large bone defects caused by implant-associated infection (n = 16), periprosthetic fracture (n = 8) or aseptic loosening (n = 4).
RESULTS: Overall 8 patients (28.6 %) had to undergo 1 (n = 5) or more (2 n = 2, 4 n = 1) revision surgeries because of dislocation (n = 4), aseptic loosening of the stem (n = 2) and periprosthetic infection (n = 2). A significant pain relief could be achieved from on average 9.0 to 38.7 (according to the Harris hip score). All patients could be mobilised postoperatively, but walking aids were necessary for the majority of patients.
CONCLUSION: A proximal femur replacement in revision arthroplasty should be regarded as a salvage procedure for restoration of extremity function. With this procedure it is possible to achieve a--limited--walking ability for patients who were immobilised preoperatively in most cases. Furthermore, pain relief can be achieved. However, the--mostly multimorbid--patients must be informed preoperatively about restrictions in daily life in order to avoid exorbitant expectations. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart , New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20183746     DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1185710

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Z Orthop Unfall        ISSN: 1864-6697            Impact factor:   0.923


  8 in total

1.  [Attachment tube for soft tissue reconstruction after implantation of a mega-endoprosthesis].

Authors:  J Hardes; H Ahrens; M Nottrott; R Dieckmann; G Gosheger; M-P Henrichs; A Streitbürger
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.154

2.  [Reconstruction of the proximal femur with the MUTARS® system].

Authors:  W Winkelmann
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Influence of stem design on the primary stability of megaprostheses of the proximal femur.

Authors:  Stefan Kinkel; Jan Dennis Graage; Jan Philippe Kretzer; Eike Jakubowitz; Jan Nadorf
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Silver-coated megaprostheses in the proximal femur in patients with sarcoma.

Authors:  Arne Streitbuerger; Marcel P Henrichs; Gregor Hauschild; Markus Nottrott; Wiebke Guder; Jendrik Hardes
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-06-20

5.  Megaendoprostheses in the management of malignant tumors of the lower extremities-risk factors for revision surgery.

Authors:  Moritz von Salis-Soglio; Mohamed Ghanem; Christian Lycke; Andreas Roth; Georg Osterhoff
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  Periprosthetic joint infections in modular endoprostheses of the lower extremities: a retrospective observational study in 101 patients.

Authors:  Dirk Zajonz; Almut Zieme; Torsten Prietzel; Michael Moche; Solveig Tiepoldt; Andreas Roth; Christoph Josten; Georg Freiherr von Salis-Soglio; Christoph-E Heyde; Mohamed Ghanem
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2016-02-09

7.  Two stage revision with a proximal femur replacement.

Authors:  Ralf Dieckmann; Tom Schmidt-Braekling; Georg Gosheger; Christoph Theil; Jendrik Hardes; Burkhard Moellenbeck
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 8.  Implant Survival, Clinical Outcome and Complications of Megaprosthetic Reconstructions Following Sarcoma Resection.

Authors:  Christoph Theil; Jan Schwarze; Georg Gosheger; Burkhard Moellenbeck; Kristian Nikolaus Schneider; Niklas Deventer; Sebastian Klingebiel; George Grammatopoulos; Friedrich Boettner; Tom Schmidt-Braekling
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-11       Impact factor: 6.639

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.