Literature DB >> 24469551

Outcome after reconstruction of the proximal humerus for tumor resection: a systematic review.

Teun Teunis1, Sjoerd P F T Nota, Francis J Hornicek, Joseph H Schwab, Santiago A Lozano-Calderón.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tumors of the appendicular skeleton commonly affect the proximal humerus, but there is no consensus regarding the best reconstructive technique after proximal humerus resection for tumors of the shoulder. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We wished to perform a systematic review to determine which surgical reconstruction offers the (1) best functional outcome as measured by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, (2) longest construct survival, and (3) lowest complication rate after proximal humerus resection for malignant or aggressive benign tumors of the shoulder.
METHODS: We searched the literature up to June 1, 2013, from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Only studies reporting results in English, Dutch, or German and with followups of 80% or more of the patients at a minimum of 2 years were included. Twenty-nine studies with 693 patients met our criteria, seven studies (24%) were level of evidence III and the remainder were level IV. Studies reported on reconstruction with prostheses (n = 17), osteoarticular allografts (n = 10), and allograft-prosthesis composites (n = 11). Owing to substantial heterogeneity and bias, we narratively report our results.
RESULTS: Functional scores in prosthesis studies ranged from 61% to 77% (10 studies, 141 patients), from 50% to 78% (eight studies, 84 patients) in osteoarticular graft studies, and from 57% to 91% (10 studies, 141 patients) in allograft-prosthesis composite studies. Implant survival ranged from 0.38 to 1.0 in the prosthesis group (341 patients), 0.33 to 1.0 in the osteoarticular allograft group (143 patients), and 0.33 to 1.0 in allograft-prosthesis group (132 patients). Overall complications per patient varied between 0.045 and 0.85 in the prosthesis group, 0 and 1.5 in the osteoarticular graft group, and 0.19 and 0.79 in the prosthesis-composite graft group. We observed a higher fracture rate for osteoarticular allografts, but other specific complication rates were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the limitations of our systematic review, we found that allograft-prosthesis composites and prostheses seem to have similar functional outcome and survival rates, and both seem to avoid fractures that are observed with osteoarticular allografts. Further collaboration in the field of surgical oncology, using randomized controlled trials, is required to establish the superiority of any particular treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24469551      PMCID: PMC4048415          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3474-4

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


  58 in total

1.  Preliminary results after reconstruction of bony defects of the proximal humerus with an allograft-resurfacing composite.

Authors:  P Ruggieri; A F Mavrogenis; G Guerra; M Mercuri
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2011-08

2.  Reconstruction of the proximal humerus for bone neoplasm using an anatomic prosthesis-bone graft composite.

Authors:  David E Hartigan; Christian J H Veillette; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; John W Sperling; Thomas C Shives; Robert H Cofield
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 0.500

3.  Does reverse shoulder arthroplasty for tumors of the proximal humerus reduce impairment?

Authors:  Lieven De Wilde; Pascal Boileau; Hans Van der Bracht
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Functional results and quality of life after shoulder girdle resections in musculoskeletal tumors.

Authors:  János Kiss; Gergely Sztrinkai; Imre Antal; Jeno Kiss; Miklós Szendroi
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2007-02-22       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Functional outcome of arthrodesis with a vascularized fibular graft and a rotational latissimus dorsi flap after proximal humerus sarcoma resection.

Authors:  Jin Wang; Jingnan Shen; Ian C Dickinson
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-02-19       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Prosthetic survival and clinical results with use of large-segment replacements in the treatment of high-grade bone sarcomas.

Authors:  M M Malawer; L B Chou
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Proximal humerus reconstructions for tumors.

Authors:  Benjamin K Potter; Sheila C Adams; J David Pitcher; Theodore I Malinin; H Thomas Temple
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-27       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Prosthetic joint replacement for long bone metastases: analysis of 154 cases.

Authors:  F Camnasio; C Scotti; G M Peretti; F Fontana; G Fraschini
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2007-10-09       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  Bone cancers.

Authors:  H D Dorfman; B Czerniak
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1995-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Experience with cemented large segment endoprostheses for tumors.

Authors:  Sanjeev Sharma; Robert E Turcotte; Marc H Isler; Cindy Wong
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  36 in total

1.  Use of Compressive Osseointegration Endoprostheses for Massive Bone Loss From Tumor and Failed Arthroplasty: A Viable Option in the Upper Extremity.

Authors:  Krista A Goulding; Adam Schwartz; Steven J Hattrup; R Lor Randall; Donald Lee; Damian M Rispoli; Daniel M Lerman; Christopher Beauchamp
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Megaprosthesis versus Allograft Prosthesis Composite for massive skeletal defects.

Authors:  Deepak Gautam; Rajesh Malhotra
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-09-25

3.  Reliability and Validity of a Japanese-language and Culturally Adapted Version of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scoring System for the Lower Extremity.

Authors:  Shintaro Iwata; Kosuke Uehara; Koichi Ogura; Toru Akiyama; Yusuke Shinoda; Tsukasa Yonemoto; Akira Kawai
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP OF FREE VASCULARIZED FIBULAR HEAD GRAFT FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PROXIMAL HUMERUS AFTER WIDE RESECTION FOR BONE SARCOMA.

Authors:  Soichi Ejiri; Takahiro Tajino; Ryoichi Kawakami; Michiyuki Hakozaki; Shin-ichi Konno
Journal:  Fukushima J Med Sci       Date:  2015-06-11

5.  Do corresponding authors take responsibility for their work? A covert survey.

Authors:  Teun Teunis; Sjoerd P F T Nota; Joseph H Schwab
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Implementation of the three-dimensional printing technology in treatment of bone tumours: a case series.

Authors:  Marijana Šimić Jovičić; Filip Vuletić; Tomislav Ribičić; Sven Šimunić; Tadija Petrović; Robert Kolundžić
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Proximal humeral osteoarticular allografts: technique, pearls and pitfalls, outcomes.

Authors:  German L Farfalli; Miguel A Ayerza; D Luis Muscolo; Luis A Aponte-Tinao
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2015-12

8.  Proximal humerus allograft prosthetic composites: technique, outcomes, and pearls and pitfalls.

Authors:  Santiago A Lozano-Calderón; Neal Chen
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2015-12

Review 9.  Fractures in bone tumour prosthesis.

Authors:  Andrea Piccioli; Barbara Rossi; Federico Maria Sacchetti; Maria Silvia Spinelli; Alberto Di Martino
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 10.  Limb Salvage and Reconstruction Options in Osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Samuel Z Grinberg; Abigail Posta; Kristy L Weber; Robert J Wilson
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 2.622

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.