PURPOSE: This study assessed implant survival and dislocation following proximal femur tumor endoprosthetic replacement. METHODS: Thirty-eight procedures were performed between 2005 and 2019. The cumulative incidence of implant revision was calculated with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: The majority of endoprostheses were bipolar hemiarthroplasty (n = 33, 86.8%). The cumulative incidence of revision was 14.6% (95% CI, 3.2%-34.1%) at five years. Dislocation occurred in 7.9% (n = 3) of hips at a mean (SD) 44 ± 35.2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal femur tumor endoprosthetic replacement is a durable option that tends to outlive patients. Strict postoperative bracing may lower dislocation rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Retrospective Study.
PURPOSE: This study assessed implant survival and dislocation following proximal femur tumor endoprosthetic replacement. METHODS: Thirty-eight procedures were performed between 2005 and 2019. The cumulative incidence of implant revision was calculated with death as a competing risk. RESULTS: The majority of endoprostheses were bipolar hemiarthroplasty (n = 33, 86.8%). The cumulative incidence of revision was 14.6% (95% CI, 3.2%-34.1%) at five years. Dislocation occurred in 7.9% (n = 3) of hips at a mean (SD) 44 ± 35.2 days. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal femur tumor endoprosthetic replacement is a durable option that tends to outlive patients. Strict postoperative bracing may lower dislocation rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Retrospective Study.
Authors: R P Veth; H K Nielsen; J Oldhoff; H Schraffordt Koops; D Mehta; J W Oosterhuis; W A Kamps; L N Göeken Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 1989-03 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Eric R Henderson; John S Groundland; Elisa Pala; Jeremy A Dennis; Rebecca Wooten; David Cheong; Reinhard Windhager; Rainer I Kotz; Mario Mercuri; Philipp T Funovics; Francis J Hornicek; H Thomas Temple; Pietro Ruggieri; G Douglas Letson Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2011-03-02 Impact factor: 5.284