header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

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

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Trauma

DISTAL FEMUR RECONSTRUCTIONS WITH MEGAPROSTHESES: A MULTICENTRIC STUDY OF IMPLANT SURVIVAL AND COMPLICATIONS ACCORDING TO A NEW CLASSIFICATION OF FAILURES

European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (EFORT) - 12th Congress



Abstract

Introduction

The current investigation includes a retrospective review of the experience of five Institutions with distal femur megaprostheses for tumor over a twenty year period, to analyze the incidence and etiology of failure, using a new classification system based upon the failure modes.

Methods

Between 1974 and 2008, 2174 patients underwent primary limb preservation for a benign or malignant extremity tumor using a metallic megaprosthesis at five Institutions, 951 (43.7%) were distal femur replacements. Retrospective analysis of complications according to the Letson and Ruggieri Classification was performed and Kaplan-Meier curves of implant survival were defined.

Segmental megaprosthetic reconstruction failures were categorized as mechanical and non-mechanical failures.

Results

A total of 951 skeletally mature patients received a segmental endoprosthesis for the treatment of an oncologic condition. Overall 261 (27%) of the primary procedures were considered failures. There were 137 mechanical failures (14.4%): 12 (1.3%) Type 1 (soft tissue failure), 65 (6.8%) Type 2 (aseptic loosening), and 60 (6.3%) Type 3 (structural failure). Non-mechanical causes accounted for 124 failures (13%): 45 (4.7%)Type 4 (tumor progression) and 79 (8.3%) Type 5 (infection). The overall implant survival to all modes of failure was 77% at 10 years and 73% at 20 years. The implant survival to aseptic loosening was over 90% at 10 years.

Conclusion

Most frequent cause of failure was infection followed by aseptic loosening and structural failure. The implant survival at long term was quite satisfactory.