| Literature DB >> 28199936 |
Toru Akiyama1, Shotaro Kanda2, Kazuo Saita3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There are currently no available prostheses that can be used for extremely small femurs or tibias of adult patients in countries where allograft is unavailable. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a 17-year-old girl requiring special limb salvage technique for distal femur reconstruction following resection of malignant tumor. This technique was needed because of a very narrow canal of the tibia. We split bilateral tibial cortices longitudinally with osteotomies to enlarge tibial canal enough to insert conventional endoprosthesis. After insertion of the implant, split tibia reduced with titanium cables and bands, and the split clefts were filled with cancellous bone. Fifteen months after the operation, proper fixation was achieved with bony fusion of bilateral split clefts and ambulation without assistance was achieved. DISCUSSION: Any proper surgical procedure for our patient were reported previously. We developed a conventional non-expandable endoprosthesis for distal femur replacement using the double longitudinal split technique as a solution to this difficult problem.Entities:
Keywords: Bone tumor; Distal femur replacement; Osteosarcoma; Surgical technique
Year: 2017 PMID: 28199936 PMCID: PMC5310171 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2017.01.063
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Surg Case Rep ISSN: 2210-2612
Fig. 1Preoperative anteroposterior (A) radiograph of the left knee of the 17-year-old female patient showing periosteal reaction on the medial aspect of the distal femur. The coronal (B) and axial (C) preoperative MRI showed tumor localization in the distal diaphysis of the femur.
Fig. 2Computer simulation view of endoprosthesis implantation in the tibia (A–F). (A–C) axial section from proximal to distal, (D–F) sagittal views from center to medial. These sequential views showed the canal of the tibia was too narrow to allow for insertion of the endoprosthesis.
Fig. 33-D plaster model (A–C). Bilateral lines were planned as split line.
Fig. 4Two months after distal femur replacement. Anteroposterior (A) and lateral (B) radiographs. Lateral radiograph demonstrates split lines below band.
Fig. 515 months after distal femur replacement. Anteroposterior (A) and lateral (B) radiographs. Lateral radiograph demonstrates healing split lines.
Fig. 6CT views of bilateral split lines 2 months after operation (A–D) and 15 months after operations (E–H). Each section shows bony union of the bilateral split clefts.