Literature DB >> 27052019

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

Joel R Peterson1, Alexander P Decilveo2, Ian T O'Connor2, Ivan Golub2, James C Wittig3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Traditional treatments for pathological fractures of the proximal femur resulting from metastatic bone disease include fixation with intramedullary nailing supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate, osteosynthesis with a plate-screw construct and polymethylmethacrylate, or endoprosthetic reconstruction. Despite the frequent practice of these treatments, treatment outcomes have not been rigorously compared. In addition, very few studies examine specific approaches to endoprosthetic reconstruction such as long stem hemiarthroplasty. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study examines survival, functional outcomes, and complications associated with long stem hemiarthroplasty in a small group of patients treated for impending and actual pathologic fractures of the proximal femur resulting from metastatic bone disease.
METHODS: Between 2012 and 2015, 21 patients were treated with long stem cemented hemiarthroplasty in 22 limbs. During that time, indications for this approach included lesions from metastases, myeloma, or lymphoma involving the proximal femur that resulted in an impending or actual pathological fracture. An impending fracture was classified as a painful lesion with at least 50% cortical erosion. During the study period, six patients with proximal femoral metastases not deemed to meet these indications were treated with other surgical approaches such as intramedullary nailing supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate and osteosynthesis with a plate-screw construct and polymethylmethacrylate. Mortality was tracked through medical records and phone calls to the patients and their families. Followup for the entire group of patients (n = 22) ranged from 1 to 27 months with a mean duration of 11 months. For patients with at least 1 year of followup (n = 11), the mean duration was 18 months (range, 12-27 months) and for patients with less than 1 year of followup (n = 11), the mean duration was 3 months (range, 1-11 months). Functional outcomes were evaluated according to the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system for lower extremities, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Scale of Performance Status, and the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) Index. Scores and complications were determined by direct patient examination, retrospective chart review, review of a longitudinally maintained institutional database, and followup phone calls.
RESULTS: Ten patients died of disease within the followup period. Before surgery, the median total MSTS score for the entire group of patients (n = 22) was 4.5 (range, 0-23), the median ECOG score was 3.5 (range, 1-4), and the median KPS score was 40 (range, 30-70). Postoperatively, the median total MSTS score (measured at most recent followup) for the entire group of patients was 21 (range, 5-30), the median ECOG score was 2 (range, 0-3, 68% ≤ 2), and the median KPS score was 60 (range, 40-100). For the 11 patients with at least 1 year of followup, the median total MSTS score (measured at most recent followup) was 27 (range, 21-30), the median ECOG score was 1 (range, 0-2, 100% ≤ 2), and the median KPS score was 80 (range, 60-100). For the remaining 11 patients with less than 1 year of followup, the median total MSTS score (measured at most recent followup) was 11 (range, 5-25), the median ECOG score was 3 (range, 1-3, 36% ≤ 2), and the median KPS score was 40 (range, 40-80). Complications included one periprosthetic fracture resulting from a fall, three cases of radiation-induced edema, and two cases of sciatica that developed unrelated to the procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: Long stem cemented hemiarthroplasty results in fair levels of function in a complex population of patients whose prognosis is sometimes measured only in months and who otherwise might be disabled by their metastatic lesions. Comparative trials applying consistent indications and inclusion criteria should be performed between this approach and fixation with intramedullary nailing supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate as well as osteosynthesis with a plate-screw construct and polymethylmethacrylate. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27052019      PMCID: PMC5289173          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-4810-7

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


  34 in total

1.  Metastasis size in pathologic femoral fractures.

Authors:  H Menck; S Schulze; E Larsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1988-04

2.  Characteristics and outcome of infections associated with tumor endoprostheses.

Authors:  J Hardes; C Gebert; A Schwappach; H Ahrens; A Streitburger; W Winkelmann; G Gosheger
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2006-04-21       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Cemented endoprosthetic replacement for metastatic bone disease in the proximal femur.

Authors:  Hakan Selek; Kerem Başarir; Yusuf Yildiz; Yener Sağlik
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2007-09-24       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Survival of current production tumor endoprostheses: complications, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis.

Authors:  E Pala; E R Henderson; T Calabrò; A Angelini; C N Abati; G Trovarelli; P Ruggieri
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 3.454

5.  The incidence of acute cardiorespiratory and vascular dysfunction following intramedullary nail fixation of femoral metastasis.

Authors:  S A Barwood; J L Wilson; R R Molnar; P F Choong
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  2000-04

6.  Survival and ambulatory function after endoprosthetic replacement for metastatic bone tumor of the proximal femur.

Authors:  Hiroatsu Nakashima; Hirohisa Katagiri; Mitsuru Takahashi; Hideshi Sugiura
Journal:  Nagoya J Med Sci       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 1.131

7.  Osteosynthesis of metastatic lesions of the proximal femur with a solid femoral nail and interlocking spiral blade inserted without reaming.

Authors:  M Assal; X Zanone; R E Peter
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Treatment of pathological fractures of the hip by endoprosthetic replacement.

Authors:  J M Lane; T P Sculco; S Zolan
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 9.  Endoprosthetic proximal femur replacement: metastatic versus primary tumors.

Authors:  Benjamin K Potter; Vincent E Chow; Sheila C Adams; G Douglas Letson; H Thomas Temple
Journal:  Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-10-02       Impact factor: 3.279

10.  Complications of cemented long-stem hip arthroplasty in metastatic bone disease revisited.

Authors:  Shawn L Price; M Aabid Farukhi; Kevin B Jones; Stephen K Aoki; R Lor Randall
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-06-20       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  11 in total

1.  Causes and Frequencies of Reoperations After Endoprosthetic Reconstructions for Extremity Tumor Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Patrick Thornley; Matias Vicente; Austin MacDonald; Nathan Evaniew; Michelle Ghert; Roberto Velez
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  What Is the Adverse Event Profile After Prophylactic Treatment of Femoral Shaft or Distal Femur Metastases?

Authors:  Ryan P McLynn; Nathaniel T Ondeck; Jonathan N Grauer; Dieter M Lindskog
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Early Improvement in Pain and Functional Outcome but Not Quality of Life After Surgery for Metastatic Long Bone Disease.

Authors:  Anas Nooh; Krista Goulding; Marc H Isler; Sophie Mottard; Annie Arteau; Norbert Dion; Robert Turcotte
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Double-plate compound osteosynthesis for pathological fractures of the proximal femur: high survivorship and low complication rate.

Authors:  Sophie R Merckaert; Christian D Fontanellaz-Castiglione; Eric D Fornari; Moritz Tannast
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Application of Endoprosthetic Replacement in Old Patients with Isolated Proximal Femoral Bone Metastases.

Authors:  Peng Liu; Zhuan Wang; Shiyuan Zhang; Guoqiang Ding; Ke Tan; Ji Zhou
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Prediction of survival after surgical management of femoral metastatic bone disease - A comparison of prognostic models.

Authors:  Charles Meares; Alexander Badran; David Dewar
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2019-02-13       Impact factor: 4.072

7.  Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study.

Authors:  Michala Skovlund Sørensen; Peter Frederik Horstmann; Klaus Hindsø; Michael Mørk Petersen
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 4.072

8.  Utility of the Current Procedural Terminology Codes for Prophylactic Stabilization for Defining Metastatic Femur Disease.

Authors:  Sarah M Hanna; Duncan C Ramsey; Yee C Doung; James B Hayden; Reid F Thompson; Andrew R Summers; Kenneth R Gundle
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev       Date:  2020-12-18

9.  Patient-reported assessment of outcome after surgery for bone metastases.

Authors:  Samantha Downie; Alison Stillie; Matthew Moran; Cathie Sudlow; Hamish Simpson
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2021-03-31

10.  Modified Unipolar Hemiarthroplasty for the Treatment of Metastatic Lesions of Proximal Femur with Pathological Fractures: Case Series of Six Patients.

Authors:  C Y Lim; S Mat-Hassan; M Awang; M F Md-Ariff; M A Hau-Abdullah
Journal:  Malays Orthop J       Date:  2019-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.