Costantino Errani1, Shinji Tsukamoto2, Nusaibah Almunhaisen1, Andreas Mavrogenis3, Davide Donati1. 1. Orthopaedic Service, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nara Medical University, Nara, Japan. 3. First Department of Orthopaedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The options for the reconstruction of diaphyseal defects following the resection of bone tumors include biological or prosthetic implants. The purpose of our study was to evaluate different types of intercalary reconstruction techniques, including massive bone allograft, extracorporeal devitalized autograft, vascularized free fibula, and modular prosthesis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of articles using the terms diaphyseal bone tumor and intercalary reconstruction. All the studies reporting the non-oncological complications such as infection, nonunion and fracture of the intercalary reconstructions were included. We excluded articles published before 2000 or did not involve humans in the study. Case reports, reviews, technique notes and opinion articles were also excluded based on the abstracts. Thirty-three articles included in this review were then studied to evaluate failure rates, complications and functional outcome of different surgical intercalary reconstruction techniques. RESULTS: Nonunion rates of allograft ranged 6%-43%, while aseptic loosening rates of modular prosthesis ranged 0%-33%. Nonunion rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 6%-43% and 0%-33%, respectively. Fracture rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 7%-45% and 0%-44%, respectively. Infection rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 0%-28% and 0%-17%, respectively. All of the allograft (range: 67%-92%), extracorporeal devitalized autograft including irradiation (87%), autoclaving (70%), pasteurization (88%), low-heat (90%) or freezing with liquid nitrogen (90%), and modular prosthesis (range: 77%-93%) had similar Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional scores. Addition of a vascularized fibula graft to allograft did not affect functional outcome [allograft with a vascularized fibula graft (range: 86%-94%) vs. allograft alone (range: 67%-92%)]. CONCLUSION: Aseptic loosening rates of modular prosthesis seem to be less than nonunion rates of allograft. Adding a vascularized fibula graft to allograft seems to increase bone union rate and reduce the risk of fractures and infections, though a vascularized fibula graft needs longer surgical time and has the disadvantage of donor site morbidity. These various intercalary reconstruction techniques with or without a vascularized fibula autograft had similar functional outcome.
INTRODUCTION: The options for the reconstruction of diaphyseal defects following the resection of bone tumors include biological or prosthetic implants. The purpose of our study was to evaluate different types of intercalary reconstruction techniques, including massive bone allograft, extracorporeal devitalized autograft, vascularized free fibula, and modular prosthesis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of articles using the terms diaphyseal bone tumor and intercalary reconstruction. All the studies reporting the non-oncological complications such as infection, nonunion and fracture of the intercalary reconstructions were included. We excluded articles published before 2000 or did not involve humans in the study. Case reports, reviews, technique notes and opinion articles were also excluded based on the abstracts. Thirty-three articles included in this review were then studied to evaluate failure rates, complications and functional outcome of different surgical intercalary reconstruction techniques. RESULTS: Nonunion rates of allograft ranged 6%-43%, while aseptic loosening rates of modular prosthesis ranged 0%-33%. Nonunion rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 6%-43% and 0%-33%, respectively. Fracture rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 7%-45% and 0%-44%, respectively. Infection rates of allograft alone and allograft with a vascularized fibula graft ranged 0%-28% and 0%-17%, respectively. All of the allograft (range: 67%-92%), extracorporeal devitalized autograft including irradiation (87%), autoclaving (70%), pasteurization (88%), low-heat (90%) or freezing with liquid nitrogen (90%), and modular prosthesis (range: 77%-93%) had similar Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional scores. Addition of a vascularized fibula graft to allograft did not affect functional outcome [allograft with a vascularized fibula graft (range: 86%-94%) vs. allograft alone (range: 67%-92%)]. CONCLUSION: Aseptic loosening rates of modular prosthesis seem to be less than nonunion rates of allograft. Adding a vascularized fibula graft to allograft seems to increase bone union rate and reduce the risk of fractures and infections, though a vascularized fibula graft needs longer surgical time and has the disadvantage of donor site morbidity. These various intercalary reconstruction techniques with or without a vascularized fibula autograft had similar functional outcome.
Authors: Rodolfo Capanna; Domenico A Campanacci; Nicolas Belot; Giovanni Beltrami; Marco Manfrini; Marco Innocenti; Massimo Ceruso Journal: Orthop Clin North Am Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 2.472
Authors: J I Albergo; L C Gaston; G L Farfalli; M Laitinen; M Parry; M A Ayerza; M Risk; L M Jeys; L A Aponte-Tinao Journal: Musculoskelet Surg Date: 2019-03-08
Authors: Matthew T Houdek; Peter S Rose; Todd A Milbrandt; Anthony A Stans; Steven L Moran; Franklin H Sim Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: M P A Bus; P D S Dijkstra; M A J van de Sande; A H M Taminiau; H W B Schreuder; P C Jutte; I C M van der Geest; G R Schaap; J A M Bramer Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Vincent Crenn; Yonis Quinette; Charlie Bouthors; Gilles Missenard; Brice Viard; Philippe Anract; Stéphane Boisgard; Eric Mascard; François Gouin Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 3.253