header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Intramedullary and total femur replacement in revision arthroplasty as a last limb-saving option

Is there any benefit from the less invasive intramedullary replacement?



Download PDF

Abstract

There has been a substantial increase in the number of hip and knee prostheses implanted in recent years, with a consequent increase in the number of revisions required. Total femur replacement (TFR) following destruction of the entire femur, usually after several previous revision operations, is a rare procedure but is the only way of avoiding amputation. Intramedullary femur replacement (IFR) with preservation of the femoral diaphysis is a modification of TFR. Between 1999 and 2010, 27 patients with non-oncological conditions underwent surgery in our department with either IFR (n = 15) or TFR (n = 12) and were included in this study retrospectively. The aim of the study was to assess the indications, complications and outcomes of IFR and TFR in revision cases. The mean follow-up period was 31.3 months (6 to 90). Complications developed in 37% of cases, 33% in the IFR group and 4% in the TFR group. Despite a trend towards a slightly better functional outcome compared with TFR, the indication for intramedullary femur replacement should be established on a very strict basis in view of the procedure’s much higher complication rate.


Correspondence should be sent to Dr S. Hoell; e-mail:

For access options please click here