Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mid- to long-term results of allograft–prosthesis composite reconstruction after removal of a distal femoral malignant tumor are comparable to those of the proximal tibia

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the outcomes of allograft–prosthesis composite for reconstruction after malignant tumors at the distal femur and proximal tibia.

Methods

Case–control study of 24 patients with distal femur tumor and 21 with proximal tibia tumor. Union of the allograft–host interface was assessed by the International Society of Limb Salvage criteria, and complications according Henderson. Functional outcome was evaluated by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score, and pain by a visual analog scale.

Results

The median follow-up in the femoral group was 11.4 (range 2.3–25.0) years, and 10.1 (range 2.2–25.0) in tibial group. Incorporation of the allograft was successful in more than 90% in both groups. Tumor location was not significant predictor for allograft failure in multivariate analysis. Aseptic prosthesis loosening occurred in two patients in either group, and another patient in the tibial group had a breakage of the tibial insert. Excluding local recurrences and amputations, the prosthesis survival at 10 years was 94.1% in the femoral group, and 83.3% in the tibial group (n.s.). For the patients with preserved limb, the median MSTS score was 23.6 in the femoral group and 22.8 in tibial group (n.s.). Likewise, there were no significant differences in median WOMAC score (n.s.) or VAS pain (n.s.).

Conclusions

Allograft–prosthesis composite is an effective procedure for distal femur tumors related to the graft, prosthesis survival, and functional outcomes. The results are comparable to those for proximal tibial tumors.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic study, Level III.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albergo JI, Gaston CL, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ayerza MA, Muscolo DL, Farfalli GL, Jeys LM, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Abudu AT, Grimer RJ (2017) Proximal tibia reconstruction after bone tumor resection: are survivorship and outcomes of endoprosthetic replacement and osteoarticular allograft similar? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:676–682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bellamy N, Buchanan W, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and the knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bernthal NM, Greenberg M, Heberer K, Eckardt JJ, Fowler EG (2015) What are the functional outcomes of endoprosthestic reconstructions after tumor resection? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:812–819

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Biau D, Faure F, Katsahian S, Jeanrot C, Tomeno B, Anract P (2006) Survival of total knee replacement with a megaprosthesis after bone tumor resection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1285–1293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Biau DJ, Dumaine V, Babinet A, Tomeno B, Anract P (2006) Allograft–prosthesis composites after bone tumor resection at the proximal tibia. Clin Orthop Relat Res 456:211–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bickels J, Wittig JC, Kollender Y, Henshaw RM, Kellar-Graney KL, Meller I, Malawer MM (2002) Distal femur resection with endoprosthetic reconstruction: a long-term follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 400:225–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bickels J, Wittig JC, Kollender Y, Neff RS, Kellar-Graney K, Meller I, Malawer MM (2001) Reconstruction of the extensor mechanism after proximal tibia endoprosthetic replacement. J Arthroplast 16:856–862

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Buchner M, Zeifang F, Bernd L (2003) Medial gastrocnemius muscle flap in limb-sparing surgery of malignant bone tumors of the proximal tibia: mid-term results in 25 patients. Ann Plast Surg 51:266–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bus MP, van de Sande MA, Fiocco M, Schaap GR, Bramer JA, Dijkstra PD (2017) What are the long-term results of Mutars modular endoprostheses for reconstruction of tumor resection of the distal femur and proximal tibia? Clin Orthop Relat Res 475:708–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bus MP, van de Sande MA, Taminiau AH, Dijkstra PD (2017) Is there still a role for osteoarticular allograft reconstruction in musculoskeletal tumour surgery? A long-term follow-up study of 38 patients and systematic review of the literature. Bone Joint J 99:522–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Campanacci L, Alì N, Casanova JM, Kreshak J, Manfrini M (2015) Resurfaced allograft-prosthetic composite for proximal tibial reconstruction in children: intermediate-term results of an original technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:241–250

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Capanna R, Scoccianti G, Frenos F, Vilardi A, Beltrami G, Campanacci DA (2015) What was the survival of megaprostheses in lower limb reconstructions after tumor resections? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:820–830

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chim H, Tan BK, Tan MH, Tan KC, Song C (2007) Optimizing the use of local muscle flaps for knee megaprosthesis coverage. Ann Plast Surg 59:398–403

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Donati D, Colangeli M, Colangeli S, Di Bella C, Mercuri M (2008) Allograft-prosthetic composite in the proximal tibia after bone tumor resection. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:459–465

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Enneking WF, Dunham W, Gebhardt MC, Malawar M, Pritchard DJ (1993) A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 286:241–246

    Google Scholar 

  16. Enneking WF, Wolf RE (1996) The staging and surgery of musculoskeletal neoplasm. Clin Orthop Relat Res 27:433–481

    Google Scholar 

  17. Farfalli GL, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ayerza MA, Muscolo DL, Boland PJ, Morris CD, Athanasian EA, Healey JH (2013) Comparison between constrained and semiconstrained knee allograft–prosthesis composite reconstructions. Sarcoma 2013:489652

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Gilbert NF, Yasko AW, Oates SD, Lewis VO, Cannon CP, Lin PP (2009) Allograft-prosthetic composite reconstruction of the proximal part of the tibia: an analysis of the early results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:1646–1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Glasser D, Langlais F (1991) The ISOLS radiological implants evaluation system. In: Langlais F, Tomeno B (eds) Limb salvage: major reconstructions in oncologic and nontumoral conditions. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  20. Henderson ER, Groundland JS, Pala E, Denis JA, Wooten R, Cheong D, Windhager R, Kotz RI, Mercuri M, Funovics PT, Hornicek FJ, Temple HT, Ruggieri P, Letson GD (2011) Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:418–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jaureguito JW, Dubois CM, Smith SR, Gottlieb LJ, Finn HA (1997) Medial gastrocnemius transposition flap for the treatment of disruption of the extensor mechanism after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:866–873

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kawai A, Lin PP, Boland PJ, Athanasian EA, Healey JH (1999) Relationship between magnitude of resection, complication, and prosthetic survival after prosthetic knee reconstructions for distal femoral tumors. J Surg Oncol 70:109–115

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mavrogenis AF, Pala E, Angelini A, Ferraro A, Ruggieri P (2012) Proximal tibial resections and reconstructions: clinical outcome of 225 patients. J Surg Oncol 107:335–342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitchell EJ, Stawarz AM, Kayacan R, Rimnac CM (2004) The effect of gamma radiation sterilization on the fatigue crack propagation resistance of human cortical bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:2648–2657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mo S, Ding ZQ, Kang LQ, Zhai WL, Liu H (2013) Modified technique using allograft-prosthetic composite in the distal femur after bone tumor resection. J Surg Res 182:68–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Müller DA, Beltrami G, Scoccianti G, Cuomo P, Capanna R (2016) Allograft-prosthetic composite versus megaprosthesis in the proximal tibia: what works best? Injury 47(suppl 4):124–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Natarajan MV, Sivaseelam A, Rajkumar G, Hussain SH (2003) Custom megaprosthetic replacement for proximal tibial tumours. Int Orthop 27:334–337

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Pala E, Trovarelli G, Angelini A, Ruggieri P (2016) Distal femur reconstruction with modular tumour prostheses: a single institution analysis of implant survival comparing fixed versus rotating hinge knee prostheses. Int Orthop 40:2171–2180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Pala E, Trovarelli G, Calabrò T, Angelini A, Abati CN, Ruggieri P (2015) Survival of modern knee tumor megaprostheses: failures, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 47:891–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Plotz W, Rechl H, Burgkart R, Messmer C, Schelter R, Hipp E, Gradinger R (2002) Limb salvage with tumor endoprostheses for malignant tumors of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 405:207–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schwartz AJ, Kabo JM, Eilber FC, Eilber FR, Eckardt JJ (2010) Cemented distal femoral endoprostheses for musculoskeletal tumor: improved survival of modular versus custom implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2198–2210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sharma S, Turcotte RE, Isler MH, Wong C (2007) Experience with cemented large segment endoprostheses for tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 459:54–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang CS, Wu PK, Chen CF, Chen WM, Liu CL, Chen TH (2015) Bone-prosthesis composite with rotating hinged-knee prosthesis in limb salvage surgery for high-grade sarcoma around the knee. J Arthroplast 30:90–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wunder JS, Leitch K, Griffin AM, Davis AM, Bell RS (2001) Comparison of two methods of reconstruction for primary malignant tumors at the knee: a sequential cohort study. J Surg Oncol 77:89–99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unit of Bone Tumors, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Arrixaca University Hospital, Murcia, Spain

    Pablo Puerta-GarciaSandoval & Maria A. Trigueros-Rentero

  2. Department of Traumatology and Orthopaedia, Miguel Hernandez University, Alicante, Spain

    Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla & Fernando A. Lopez-Prats

  3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Elda University Hospital, Ctra Elda-Sax s/n, 03600, Elda, Alicante, Spain

    Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla

Authors
  1. Pablo Puerta-GarciaSandoval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria A. Trigueros-Rentero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fernando A. Lopez-Prats
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Study approved by the Ethics Committee of the Elda University Hospital (PI2017/0154).

Informed consent

Informed consent was not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Puerta-GarciaSandoval, P., Lizaur-Utrilla, A., Trigueros-Rentero, M.A. et al. Mid- to long-term results of allograft–prosthesis composite reconstruction after removal of a distal femoral malignant tumor are comparable to those of the proximal tibia. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27, 2218–2225 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5110-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5110-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation