Endoprosthetic Reconstructions

Abstract

Our primary goal in doing this study was to determine the effect of prosthesis location, patient age, periprosthetic infection, and primary versus revision placement on endoprosthetic survival. We also examined our endoprosthetic survival rates and reasons for failure. We retrospectively studied 139 endoprosthetic reconstructions performed between 1984 and 2002, including 57 distal femur, 27 proximal femur, 26 proximal tibia, 17 proximal humerus, 4 distal humerus, 3 total scapula, 3 total femur, and 2 total humerus reconstructions. Location of reconstruction and presence of periprosthetic infection significantly affected endoprosthetic survival. Survival was not affected by patient age or primary versus revision placement. Overall, Kaplan-Meier event-free endoprosthetic survival was 86%, 80%, and 69% at 3, 5, and 10-year followup. The trend for endoprosthetic survival from best to worst was proximal femur, proximal humerus, distal femur, proximal tibia, and distal humerus. Reasons for failure included mechanical failure (eight patients), tumor recurrence (eight patients), aseptic loosening (six patients), dislocation (two patients), periprosthetic infection (two patients), and endoprosthetic malalignment (one patient). Our periprosthetic infection rate was 2.2%. The local recurrence rate in patients treated for primary malignant tumors was 6.8%, similar to previous limb-salvage and amputation studies. Overall, we have found that endoprosthetic reconstruction is a reliable limb-salvage technique. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic study, Level IV-2 (case series). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.