» Articles » PMID: 23597115

Comparison of Allograft-prosthetic Composite Reconstruction and Modular Prosthetic Replacement in Proximal Femur Bone Tumors: Functional Assessment by Gait Analysis in 20 Patients

Overview
Journal Acta Orthop
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2013 Apr 20
PMID 23597115
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Purpose: The methods of reconstruction for proximal femur bone tumors that are used most often include modular prosthetic replacement and allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction. In modular prostheses, the abductors are detached from the insertion and then reinserted into the implant, and the iliopsoas is detached and left free. In the allograft-prosthesis composite, the detached tendons are fixated to the graft. We assessed whether the latter procedure provides functional advantages regarding gait.

Patients And Methods: We studied 2 groups of 10 patients, each with prosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur either with modular prosthetic replacement or with allograft-prosthesis composite. Functional performance was analyzed by gait analysis 2.5-10 years after surgery. At that time, all the patients had good function according to the Musculoskeletal Society score.

Results: Walking speed was reduced in all patients, and especially in patients with modular prosthetic replacement. Different hip extension patterns during late stance were found in the 2 groups. Surface EMG showed a typical prolonged muscle co-contraction pattern during gait, which was more evident in modular prosthetic patients.

Interpretation: Although both procedures provided good functional outcome in the long-term follow-up, gait analysis revealed mechanical changes during gait that were probably related to the muscle reinsertion procedure. Direct fixation of the muscles to the bone graft appeared to result in a more efficient muscular recovery.

Citing Articles

Allograft-prosthesis composite after proximal femur bone tumor resection in pediatric age: Is it effective in preserving bone stock?.

Campanacci D, Scanferla R, Muratori F, Scolari F, Scoccianti G, Tamburini A J Child Orthop. 2024; 18(5):531-539.

PMID: 39421396 PMC: 11483815. DOI: 10.1177/18632521241269338.


What Are the Complications, Reconstruction Survival, and Functional Outcomes of Modular Prosthesis and Allograft-prosthesis Composite for Proximal Femur Reconstruction in Children With Primary Bone Tumors?.

Atherley OMeally A, Rizzi G, Cosentino M, Aiba H, Aso A, Solou K Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2024; 483(3):455-469.

PMID: 39235267 PMC: 11827998. DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003245.


Similar complications, implant survival, and function following modular prosthesis and allograft-prosthesis composite reconstructions of the proximal femur for primary bone tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Atherley OMeally A, Cosentino M, Aiba H, Aso A, Solou K, Rizzi G Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024; 34(3):1581-1595.

PMID: 38363346 DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-03846-5.


Innovation in proximal femoral replacement for oncology patients-A novel eggshell procedure.

Zhao J, Ma X, Feng H J Bone Oncol. 2023; 39:100473.

PMID: 36915896 PMC: 10006687. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbo.2023.100473.


Prosthetic reconstruction following resection of lower extremity bone neoplasms: A systematic review and -analysis.

Filis P, Varvarousis D, Ntritsos G, Dimopoulos D, Filis N, Giannakeas N J Bone Oncol. 2022; 36:100452.

PMID: 36105628 PMC: 9465097. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbo.2022.100452.


References
1.
Rosenbaum D, Brandes M, Hardes J, Gosheger G, Rodl R . Physical activity levels after limb salvage surgery are not related to clinical scores-objective activity assessment in 22 patients after malignant bone tumor treatment with modular prostheses. J Surg Oncol. 2008; 98(2):97-100. DOI: 10.1002/jso.21091. View

2.
Donati D, Di Bella C, Frisoni T, Cevolani L, DeGroot H . Alloprosthetic composite is a suitable reconstruction after periacetabular tumor resection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(5):1450-8. PMC: 3069274. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1799-9. View

3.
Langlais F, Lambotte J, Collin P, Thomazeau H . Long-term results of allograft composite total hip prostheses for tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003; (414):197-211. DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000079270.91782.23. View

4.
Bach C . [Gait analysis in patients with tumor endoprostheses of the HMRS type]. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 1996; 108(6):184-6. View

5.
Rompen J, Ham S, Halbertsma J, van Horn J . Gait and function in patients with a femoral endoprosthesis after tumor resection: 18 patients evaluated 12 years after surgery. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002; 73(4):439-46. DOI: 10.1080/00016470216319 . View