The Long-Term Results of Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Proximal Femur Tumors

Cover Page

Abstract

Relevance. The development of the modern principles of combined tumor treatment has significantly improved the survival of the patients. For these patients, the organ-preserving surgerybecomes now the mainstream tactics. For the restoration of the lower limb support ability and the hip function, the hip arthroplasty is now the most used type of surgery. Purpose of the study. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the long-term results of hip arthroplasty in the patients with extensive proximal femur defects caused by tumors and tumor-like lesions. Materials and Methods. The data on 126 patients with proximal femur tumors, undergone the surgical treatment in 2000–2013, were collected and summarized. The average age of the patients was 53.8 years (26–74), 94 women (74.6%), and 32 men (25.4%). There were 16 primary malignant bone tumors (12.7%), 10 benign aggressive (7.9%); 92 metastatic (73%), and 8 tumor-like lesions (6.4%). The average follow-up after the surgery was 72.6 months. The complications classification and analysis were performed according to the criteria of the International Society of Limb Salvage 2014 (ISOLS 2014). For the assessment of the functional result, patients were divided into 4 groups. In this context, the following indicators were taken into account: whether the acetabular component or the bipolar head were used, and the method of the soft tissues fixation to the femoral component of the endoprosthesis. Functional outcome was evaluated using the international Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system at 3, 6, and 12 months. Results. The total number of complications, identified during the observation period from 2000 to 2018, was 26 (20.6%). The oncological complications, represented by local recurrence, were detected on average after 11.5 months. The total number of local recurrences is 6 (4.7%) which amounted to 23% in the structure of all complications. Dislocations of the endoprosthesis became the most frequent complication — 13 (10.3%) observations, 50% in the structure of all complications. Only one patient with aseptic instability of the femoral component was identified over the entire follow-up period. There were 4 (3.1%) patients with complications due to the destruction of metal constructions. All of them had an endoprosthesis stem fracture. The average period of onset of these complications was 122.5 months. Prosthetic joint infection was observed in 2 (1.6%) patients (7.2% of all complications), on the 14th and 31st days. The patient with the latter onset of infection underwent a twostaged revision arthroplasty. Functional result by the MSTS scale: 3 months — 74.8%, 6 months — 79%, 12 months 81.8%. In the patients under investigation, 5-, 10-, and 15-year survival for aggressive benign tumors and tumorlike lesions was 95%, 84%, 62%; for malignant primary tumors — 88%, 65%, 24%; for secondary bone lesions 55%, 43%, 12%, respectively. Conclusion. The use of a bipolar head made it possible to reduce the likelihood of an endoprosthesis dislocation. The fixation of the preserved muscle elements with a polymer mesh made it possible to obtain the best functional result already in the early postoperative period.

About the authors

I. M. Mikailov

Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Author for correspondence.
Email: mim17@mail.ru

Ilkin M. Mikailov — Research Assistant, Scientific Department of Neuroorthopedics and Bone Tumors

St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

R. M. Tikhilov

Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Rashid M. Tikhilov — Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Director, Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Professor, Traumatology and Orthopedics Department, Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

D. A. Ptashnikov

Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Dmitry A. Ptashnikov — Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of Scientific Department of Neuroorthopedics and Bone Tumors, Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Head of Traumatology and Orthopedics Department, Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

A. A. Denisov

Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Anton A. Denisov — PhD Student

St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

P. V. Grigoriev

Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Petr V. Grigoriev — Cand. Sci. (Med.), Orthopedic Surgeon

St. Petersburg

Russian Federation

References

  1. Соколовский А.В., Соколовский А.А., Алиев М.Д. Отдаленные результаты онкологического эндопротезирования области тазобедренного сустава при поражении первичными и метастатическими опухолями. Саркомы костей, мягких тканей и опухоли кожи. 2019;11(3):5-16.
  2. Grimer R.J., Aydin B.K., Wafa H., Carter S.R., Jeys L., Abudu A., Parry M. Very long-term outcomes after endoprosthetic replacement for malignant tumours of bone. Bone Joint J. 2016; 98-B(6):857-864. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B6.37417.
  3. Ahlmann E.R., Menendez L.R., Kermani C., Gotha H. Survivorship and clinical outcome of modular endoprosthetic reconstruction for neoplastic disease of the lower limb. J Bone Joint Surgery B. 2006;88:790-795. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B6.17519.
  4. Misaghi A., Goldin A., Awad M., Kulidjian A.A. Osteosarcoma: a comprehensive review. SICOT J. 2018; 4:12. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2017028.
  5. Donati D., Zavatta M., Gozzi E., Giacomini S., Campanacci L., Mercuri M. Modular prosthetic replacement of the proximal femur after resection of a bone tumour. J Bone Joint Surg B. 2001;83(8): 1156-1160. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.83b8.12165.
  6. Janssen S.J., Langerhuizen D.W.G., Schwab J.H., Bramer J.A.M. Outcome after reconstruction of proximal femoral tumors: A systematic review. J Surg Oncol. 2019;119(1):120-129. doi: 10.1002/jso.25297.
  7. Janssen S.J., Teunis T., Hornicek F.J., van Dijk C.N., Bramer J.A.M., Schwab J.H. Outcome after fixation of metastatic proximal femoral fractures: A systematic review of 40 studies. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(4):507-519. doi: 10.1002/jso.24345.
  8. Henderson E.R., Groundland J.S., Pala E., Dennis J.A., Wooten R., Cheong D. et al. Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(5):418-429. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00834.
  9. Henderson E.R., O’Connor M.I., Ruggieri P., Windhager R., Funovics P.T., Gibbons C.L. et al. Classification of failure of limb salvage after reconstructive surgery for bone tumours: a modified system Including biological and expandable reconstructions. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B (11):1436-1440. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34747.
  10. Enneking W.F., Dunham W., Gebhardt M.C., Malawer M., Pritchard D.J. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;(286):241-246.
  11. Thambapillary S., Dimitriou R., Makridis K.G., Fragkakis E.M., Bobak P., Giannoudis P.V. Implant longevity, complications and functional outcome following proximal femoral arthroplasty for musculoskeletal tumors: a systematic review. J Arthroplasty.2013;28(8):13811385. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.10.024.
  12. Calabró T., Van Rooyen R., Piraino I., Pala E., Trovarelli G., Panagopoulos G.N. et al. Reconstruction of the proximal femur with a modular resection prosthesis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2016;26(4):415-421. doi: 10.1007/s00590-016-1764-0.
  13. Chandrasekar C.R., Grimer R.J., Carter S.R., Tillman R.M., Abudu A., Buckley L. Modular endoprosthetic replacement for tumours of the proximal femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(1):108-112. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B1.20448.
  14. Sevelda F., Schuh R., Hofstaetter J.G., Schinhan M., Windhager R., Funovics P.T. Total Femur Replacement After Tumor Resection: Limb Salvage Usually Achieved But Complications and Failures are Common. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(6):2079-2087. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4282-1.
  15. Janssen S.J., Langerhuizen D.W.G., Schwab J.H., Bramer J.A.M. Outcome after reconstruction of proximal femoral tumors: A systematic review. J Surg Oncol. 2019;119(1):120-129. doi: 10.1002/jso.25297.
  16. Unwin P.S., Cannon S.R., Grimer R.J., Kemp H.B.S., Sneath R.S., Walker P.S. Aseptic loosening in cemented custom-made prosthetic replacements for bone tumours of the lower limb. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78(1):5-13.
  17. Menendez L.R., Ahlmann E.R., Kermani C., Gotha H. Endoprosthetic reconstruction for neoplasms of the proximal femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 450:46-51. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000229332.91158.05.
  18. Bernthal N.M., Schwartz A.J., Oakes D.A., Kabo J.M., Eckardt J.J. How long do endoprosthetic reconstructions for proximal femoral tumors last? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468: 2867- 2874. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1369-6.
  19. Wu Y.N., Wang D.Y., Bi W.Z., Han G., Jia J.P., Xu M. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, wide resection and custom prosthetic replacement for tumors of the proximal femur. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2016; 9: 20474-20483.
  20. Finstein J.L., King J.J., Fox E.J., Ogilvie C.M., Lackman R.D. Bipolar proximal femoral replacement prostheses for musculoskeletal neoplasms. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;459:66-75. doi: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e31804f5474.
  21. Stevenson J.D., Kumar V.S., Cribb G.L., Cool P. Hemiarthroplasty proximal femoral endoprostheses following tumour reconstruction: is acetabular replacement necessary? Bone Joint J. 2018;100-B:101-108. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B1.BJJ-2017-0005.R1.
  22. Potter B.K., Chow V.E., Adams S.C., Letson G.D., Temple H.T. Endoprosthetic proximal femur replacement: metastatic versus primary tumors. Surg Oncol. 2009;18(4): 343-349. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2008.08.007.
  23. Janssen S.J., Kortlever J.T., Ready J.E., Raskin K.A., Ferrone M.L., Hornicek F.J. et al. Complications After Surgical Management of Proximal Femoral Metastasis: A Retrospective Study of 417 Patients. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24(7):483-494. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00043.
  24. Houdek M.T., Watts C.D., Wyles C.C., Rose P.S., Taunton M.J., Sim F.H. Functional and oncologic outcome of cemented endoprosthesis for malignant proximal femoral tumors. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114:501-506. doi: 10.1002/jso.24339.
  25. Du Z., Tang S., Yang R., Tang X., Ji T., Guo W. Use of an artificial ligament decreases hip dislocation and improves limb function after total femoral prosthetic replacement following femoral tumor resection. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1507-1514. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.017.
  26. Dominkus M., Sabeti M., Kotz R. [Functional tendon repair in orthopedic tumor surgery]. Orthopade. 2005;34(6):556-559. (In German). doi: 10.1007/s00132-005-0802-0.
  27. Паршиков В.В., Самсонов А.В., Романов Р.В., Градусов В.П., Самсонов А.А., Ходак В.А. и др. Первый опыт пластики брюшной стенки эндопротезами из титанового шелка. Медицинский альманах. 2012;1(20):107-110.
  28. Zoccali C., Attala D., Scotto di Uccio A., Rossi B., Scotto G., Biagini R. The dual mobility cup in muscular skeletal oncology: rationale and indications. Int Orthop. 2017;41(3):447-453. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3407-4.
  29. Plummer D., Passen E., Alexander J., Vajapey S., Frantz T., Niedermeier S. et al. Rapid return to function and stability with dual mobility components cemented into an acetabular reconstructive cage for large osseous defects in the setting of periacetabular metastatic disease. J Surg Oncol. 2019;119(8):1155-1160. doi: 10.1002/jso.25463.
  30. Guyen O., Pibarot V., Vaz G., Chevillotte C., Béjui-Hugues J. Use of a dual mobility socket to manage total hip arthroplasty instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(2):465-472. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0476-0.

Statistics

Views

Abstract: 456

Dimensions

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

PlumX


Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies