Therapeutic options to prevent recurrence of an aggressive aneurysmatic bone cyst of the cervical spine of a 16 year old boy - a case report

The aneurysmatic bone cyst (ABC) is a benign primary bone tumour. If located in the cervical spine, its expansive growth and destructive behaviour may lead to instability and serious neurological impairment. We report a case of a 16-year-old boy with an aggressive ABC in the 7th cervical vertebra. Computertomographic and magnetic resonance imaging revealed the envelopment of the left 7th and 8th spinal nerve along with the anterior displacement of the left vertebral artery. The interdisciplinary surgical strategy consisted of a partially incomplete cyst resection, subtotal spondylectomy with posterior screw-and-rod fixation from C6-Th1, iliac crest bone grafting and anterior plating from C6-Th1. With regard to the high rate of recurrence after incomplete resection published in the recent literature, the patient was postoperatively treated by megavoltage radiotherapy with a total dose of 30Gy (daily dose of 1.8 Gy for 3 weeks). The clinical and radiographic follow-up showed complete recovery of all neurologic impairments and no signs of tumour recurrence at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. This case highlights diverse treatment regimens and shall outline the challenge and the problems of the interdisciplinary decision-making in adolescents presenting with ABC in high-demanding anatomical regions

Megaendoprostheses in the management of malignant tumors of the lower extremities—risk factors for revision surgery

Background!#!Improved oncological and surgical measures now enable curative treatment of malignant lower extremity tumors in majority of cases. Complication rates associated with surgical resection of lower extremity tumors and replacement with megaendoprostheses are high. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors that predispose to revision surgery following the use of megaimplants in curative treatment of malignant tumors of the lower extremities.!##!Methods!#!this retrospective study included patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent implantation of a megaendoprosthesis for tumors or metastatic lesions of the lower extremities between January 2010 and December 2020. Baseline characteristics and information on adjuvant treatment, hospitalization time, comorbidities, mobility, complications, and revision surgery were considered. Primary outcomes were revision surgery and reasons for revision. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital complications and the duration of hospitalization.!##!Results!#!Fifty-four patients (48% female, age 63 years, SD 15) were available for final analysis. Surgeries were performed at hip level in 37 patients (68.5%) and at knee level in 17 patients (31.5%). Revision for wound-related causes was performed in 12 cases (22.2%), with microbiological proof of infection in 8 cases (14.8%). Revision for hip joint instability was carried out in 4 cases (7.4%) and for disconnection between components of the megaimplant in 2 cases (3.7%). Those patients requiring a wound-related revision had undergone a longer primary surgical intervention than those who required an implant-related revision (276 vs 134 min, p = .002). Wound drains after the primary implantation remained longer in situ in patients who later required revision surgery for wound-related complications (5 vs 3 days, p = .020). An ASA > 3 was associated with an increased likelihood for in-hospital complications in general (p = .041), and in-hospital death in particular (p = .012).!##!Conclusions!#!The management of malignant tumors of the lower extremities with megaendoprostheses is associated with a high rate of wound-related complications. Swift surgical performance and early postoperative removal of wound drains minimize the risk of complications in general and the necessity of revision surgery in particular. Patients with more comorbidities were more likely to suffer in-hospital complications

Bipolar hip arthroplasty as salvage treatment for loosening of the acetabular cup with significant bone defects

Introduction: Revision arthroplasty of the hip is becoming increasingly important in recent years. Early primary arthroplasty and longer life expectancy of the patients increases the number of revision surgery. Revision surgery of hip arthroplasty is major surgery for the patients, especially the elderly, with significant risks concerning the general condition of the patient. The aim of this work is to evaluate the outcome of bipolar hip arthroplasty as a salvage procedure for treatment of loosening of the acetabular cup with significant acetabular bone defects after total hip replacement (THR) in multi-morbid patients.Patients and methods: During the period from January 1 2007 to December 31 2011 19 revision hip surgeries were performed in , in which the loosened acetabular cup was replaced by a bipolar head. The examined patient group consisted exclusively of female patients with an average of 75 years. The predominant diagnosis was “aseptic loosening” (84.2%). All patients in our study were multi-morbid. We decided to resort to bipolar hip arthroplasty due to the compromised general condition of patients and the major acetabular bone defects, which were confirmed intraoperatively. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 0.5 to 67 months (average 19.1 months). Results: Evaluation of the modified Harris Hip Score showed an overall improvement of the function of the hip joint after surgery of approximately 45%.Surgery was less time consuming and thus adequate for patients with significantly poor general health condition. We noticed different complications in a significant amount of patients (68.4%). The most common complication encountered was the proximal migration of the bipolar head.The rate of revision following the use of bipolar hip arthroplasty in revision surgery of the hip in our patients was high (21%). Despite the high number of complications reported in our study, we have noticed significant improvement of hip joint function as well as subjective pain relief in the majority of patients. We clearly achieved clinically satisfactory results in 14 patients.Conclusion: Bipolar hip arthroplasty is by no means to be regarded as standard procedure in revision surgery of THR. It provides an option or salvage procedure for patients with poor general condition in whom the quickest possible surgical intervention preserving mobility is required. This is particularly true for multi-morbid patients in whom sufficient acetabular fixation is not possible

Bipolar hip arthroplasty as salvage treatment for loosening of the acetabular cup with significant bone defects

Introduction: Revision arthroplasty of the hip is becoming increasingly important in recent years. Early primary arthroplasty and longer life expectancy of the patients increases the number of revision surgery. Revision surgery of hip arthroplasty is major surgery for the patients, especially the elderly, with significant risks concerning the general condition of the patient. The aim of this work is to evaluate the outcome of bipolar hip arthroplasty as a salvage procedure for treatment of loosening of the acetabular cup with significant acetabular bone defects after total hip replacement (THR) in multi-morbid patients.Patients and methods: During the period from January 1 2007 to December 31 2011 19 revision hip surgeries were performed in , in which the loosened acetabular cup was replaced by a bipolar head. The examined patient group consisted exclusively of female patients with an average of 75 years. The predominant diagnosis was “aseptic loosening” (84.2%). All patients in our study were multi-morbid. We decided to resort to bipolar hip arthroplasty due to the compromised general condition of patients and the major acetabular bone defects, which were confirmed intraoperatively. The postoperative follow-up ranged from 0.5 to 67 months (average 19.1 months). Results: Evaluation of the modified Harris Hip Score showed an overall improvement of the function of the hip joint after surgery of approximately 45%.Surgery was less time consuming and thus adequate for patients with significantly poor general health condition. We noticed different complications in a significant amount of patients (68.4%). The most common complication encountered was the proximal migration of the bipolar head.The rate of revision following the use of bipolar hip arthroplasty in revision surgery of the hip in our patients was high (21%). Despite the high number of complications reported in our study, we have noticed significant improvement of hip joint function as well as subjective pain relief in the majority of patients. We clearly achieved clinically satisfactory results in 14 patients.Conclusion: Bipolar hip arthroplasty is by no means to be regarded as standard procedure in revision surgery of THR. It provides an option or salvage procedure for patients with poor general condition in whom the quickest possible surgical intervention preserving mobility is required. This is particularly true for multi-morbid patients in whom sufficient acetabular fixation is not possible

Periprosthetic joint infections in modular endoprostheses of the lower extremities: a retrospective observational study in 101 patients

Background: Modular mega-endoprosthesis systems are used to bridge very large bone defects and have become a widespread method in orthopaedic surgery for the treatment of tumours and revision arthroplasty. However, the indications for the use of modular mega-endoprostheses must be carefully considered. Implanting modular endoprostheses requires major, complication-prone surgery in which the limited salvage procedures should always be borne in mind. The management of periprosthetic infection is particularly difficult and beset with problems. Given this, the present study was designed to gauge the significance of periprosthetic infections in connection with modular mega-implants in the lower extremities among our own patients. Methods: Patients who had been fitted with modular endoprosthesis on a lower extremity at our department between September 1994 and December 2011 were examined retrospectively. A total of 101 patients with 114 modular prostheses were identified. Comprising 30 men (29.7 %) and 71 women (70.3 %), their average age at the time of surgery was 67 years (18–92 years). Results: The average follow-up period was 27 months (5 months and 2 weeks to 14 years and 11 months) and the drop-out rate was about 8.8 %. Altogether, there were 19 (17.7 %) endoprosthesis infections: 3 early infections and 16 late or delayed infections. The pathogen spectrum was dominated by coagulase-negative staphylococci (36 %) and Staphylococcus aureus (16 %), including 26 % multi-resistant pathogens. Reinfection occurred in 37 % of cases of infection. Tumours were followed by significantly fewer infections than the other indications. Infections were twice as likely to occur after previous surgery. Conclusion: In our findings modular endoprostheses (18 %) are much more susceptible to infection than primary endoprostheses (0.5–2,5 %). Infection is the most common complication alongside the dislocation of proximal femur endoprostheses. Consistent, radical surgery is essential – although even with an adequate treatment strategy, the recurrence rate is very high. Unfortunately, the functional results are frequently unsatisfactory, with amputation often being the last resort. Therefore, the indication for implantation must be carefully considered and discussed in great detail, especially in the case of multimorbid patients with previous joint infections