Cemented Endoprosthetic Reconstruction of the Proximal Tibia: How Long Do They Last?

The few available studies documenting the long-term survival of cemented proximal tibial endoprostheses for musculoskeletal tumors do not differentiate between stem designs or patient diagnosis. There is wide variation in survival rates reported, possibly a result of this heterogeneity in patient population and implant design. We therefore asked: (1) How long do proximal tibial endoprostheses last? (2) What is the typical long-term functional result after proximal tibial replacement? And (3) what are the short- and long-term complications associated with endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal tibia, particularly with respect to the soft tissue reconstruction? We retrospectively reviewed 52 patients with 52 proximal tibial endoprosthetic reconstructions for a tumor-related diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using revision of the stemmed components for any reason as an endpoint for implants, and death due to disease progression for patients. Function was assessed using the MSTS scoring system. The minimum followup was 1 month (mean, 96 months: range, 1–284 months; median, 69 months). Using revision of the stemmed components for any reason as an end point, overall prosthesis survival at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years was 94%, 86%, 66%, and 37%, respectively. The 29 modular implants demonstrated a trend toward improved survival compared to the 23 custom-designed components, with a 15-year survivorship of 88% versus 63%. The mean postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score at most recent followup was 82% of normal function (mean raw score, 24.6; range, 4–29). Cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal tibia provides a reliable method of reconstruction following tumor resection. Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

The Friedman-Eilber Resection Arthroplasty of the Pelvis

It has been argued that internal hemipelvectomy without reconstruction of the pelvic ring leads to poor ambulation and inferior patient acceptance. To determine the accuracy of this contention, we posed the following questions: First, how effectively does a typical patient ambulate following this procedure? Second, what is the typical functional capacity of a patient following internal hemipelvectomy? In the spring of 2006, we obtained video documentation of eight patients who had undergone resection arthroplasty of the hemipelvis seen in our clinic during routine clinical followup. The minimum followup in 2006 was 1.1 years (mean, 8.2 years; range, 1.1–22.7 years); at the time of last followup in 2008 the minimum followup was 2.9 years (mean, 9.8 years; range, 2.9–24.5 years). At last followup seven of the eight patients were without pain, and were able to walk without supports. The remaining patient used narcotic medication and a cane or crutch only occasionally. The mean MSTS score at the time of most recent followup was 73.3% of normal (range 53.3–80.0%; mean raw score was 22.0; range 16–24). All eight patients ultimately returned to gainful employment. These observations demonstrate independent painless ambulation and acceptable function is possible following resection arthroplasty of the hemipelvis. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Cemented Distal Femoral Endoprostheses for Musculoskeletal Tumor: Improved Survival of Modular versus Custom Implants

Advocates of newer implant designs cite high rates of aseptic loosening and failure as reasons to abandon traditional cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction of the distal femur. We asked whether newer, modular distal femoral components had improved survivorship compared with older, custom-casted designs. We retrospectively reviewed 254 patients who underwent distal femoral endoprosthetic reconstruction. We excluded two patients with cementless implants, 27 with expandable prostheses, and 39 who had a nontumor diagnosis. This left 186 patients: 101 with older custom implants and 85 with contemporary modular implants. The minimum followup was 1 month (mean, 96.0 months; range, 1–336 months). The tumor was classified as Stage IIA/IIB in 122 patients, Stage IA/IB or benign in 43, and Stage III or metastatic in 21. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed overall 10-, 20-, and 25-year implant survival rates of 77%, 58%, and 50%, respectively, using revision of the stemmed components as an end point. The 85 modular components had a greater 15-year survivorship than the 101 custom-designed implants: 93.7% versus 51.7%, respectively. Thirty-five stemmed components (18.8%) were revised for aseptic loosening in 22 patients, implant fatigue fracture in 10, infection in two, and local recurrence in one. Cemented modular rotating-hinge distal femoral endoprostheses demonstrated improved survivorship compared with custom-casted implants during this three-decade experience. Patients with low-grade disease and long-term survivors of high-grade localized disease should expect at least one or more revision procedures in their lifetime. Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Chemotherapy Is Associated With Improved Survival in Adult Patients With Primary Extremity Synovial Sarcoma

Two prospectively collected sarcoma databases were used to analyze the impact of ifosfamide-based chemotherapy on the survival of patients with high-risk primary extremity synovial sarcoma. Ifosfamide-based chemotherapy was associated with an improved survival compared with patients that received no chemotherapy