Larger stem to bone diameter ratio predicts lower cemented endoprosthesis failure
© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC..
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: With continued advances in treatment options, patients with endoprosthetic reconstruction are living longer and consequently relying upon their devices for a longer duration. Major causes of endoprosthesis failure include aseptic loosening and mechanical failure. In the setting of tumor resection, loss of bone stock and use of radiation therapy increase the risk for these complications. As such, considerations of remaining native bone and stem length and diameter may be increasingly important. We asked the following questions: (1) What was the overall rate of endoprosthesis failure at a minimum of 5-year follow-up? (2) Does resection length increase implant failure rates? (3) Does implant size and its ratio to cortical width of bone alter implant failure rates?.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patient outcomes at a single institution between the years of 1999-2022 who underwent cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction at the hip or knee and identified 150 patients. Of these 150, 55 had a follow-up of greater than 5 years and were used for analysis. Radiographs of these patients at time of surgery were assessed and measured for resection length, bone diameter, stem diameter, and remaining bone length. Resection percentage, and stem to bone diameter ratios were then calculated and their relationship to endoprosthesis failure were analyzed.
RESULTS: Patients in this cohort had a mean age of 55.8, and mean follow-up of 59.96 months. There were 78 distal femoral replacements (52%), 16 proximal femoral replacements (10.7%), and 56 proximal tibial replacements (37.3%). There were five patients who experienced aseptic loosening and six patients who experienced mechanical failure. Patients with implant failure had a smaller mean stem to bone diameter (36% vs. 44%; p = 0.002). A stem to bone diameter of 40% appeared to be a breaking point between success and failure in this series, with 90% of patients with implant failure having a stem: bone ratio less than 40%. Stem to bone ratio less than 40% increased risk for failure versus stems that were at least 40% the diameter of bone (6/19 [31.6%] vs. 0/36 [0%]; odds ratio 0.68; p < 0.001). Resection length did not appear to have an impact on the rates of aseptic loosening and mechanical failure in this series.
CONCLUSIONS: Data from this series suggests a benefit to using stems with a larger diameter when implanting cemented endoprostheses at the hip or knee. Stems which were less than 40% the diameter of bone were substantially more likely to undergo implant failure.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:129 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of surgical oncology - 129(2024), 5 vom: 14. Apr., Seite 995-999 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Kadkoy, Yazan [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Aseptic loosening |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 01.04.2024 Date Revised 01.04.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1002/jso.27587 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM367122154 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM367122154 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240401232519.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240115s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1002/jso.27587 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1359.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM367122154 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38221660 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Kadkoy, Yazan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Larger stem to bone diameter ratio predicts lower cemented endoprosthesis failure |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 01.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: With continued advances in treatment options, patients with endoprosthetic reconstruction are living longer and consequently relying upon their devices for a longer duration. Major causes of endoprosthesis failure include aseptic loosening and mechanical failure. In the setting of tumor resection, loss of bone stock and use of radiation therapy increase the risk for these complications. As such, considerations of remaining native bone and stem length and diameter may be increasingly important. We asked the following questions: (1) What was the overall rate of endoprosthesis failure at a minimum of 5-year follow-up? (2) Does resection length increase implant failure rates? (3) Does implant size and its ratio to cortical width of bone alter implant failure rates? | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patient outcomes at a single institution between the years of 1999-2022 who underwent cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction at the hip or knee and identified 150 patients. Of these 150, 55 had a follow-up of greater than 5 years and were used for analysis. Radiographs of these patients at time of surgery were assessed and measured for resection length, bone diameter, stem diameter, and remaining bone length. Resection percentage, and stem to bone diameter ratios were then calculated and their relationship to endoprosthesis failure were analyzed | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Patients in this cohort had a mean age of 55.8, and mean follow-up of 59.96 months. There were 78 distal femoral replacements (52%), 16 proximal femoral replacements (10.7%), and 56 proximal tibial replacements (37.3%). There were five patients who experienced aseptic loosening and six patients who experienced mechanical failure. Patients with implant failure had a smaller mean stem to bone diameter (36% vs. 44%; p = 0.002). A stem to bone diameter of 40% appeared to be a breaking point between success and failure in this series, with 90% of patients with implant failure having a stem: bone ratio less than 40%. Stem to bone ratio less than 40% increased risk for failure versus stems that were at least 40% the diameter of bone (6/19 [31.6%] vs. 0/36 [0%]; odds ratio 0.68; p < 0.001). Resection length did not appear to have an impact on the rates of aseptic loosening and mechanical failure in this series | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: Data from this series suggests a benefit to using stems with a larger diameter when implanting cemented endoprostheses at the hip or knee. Stems which were less than 40% the diameter of bone were substantially more likely to undergo implant failure | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a aseptic loosening | |
| 650 | 4 | |a endoprosthesis failure | |
| 650 | 4 | |a endoprosthetic reconstruction | |
| 650 | 4 | |a implant failure | |
| 650 | 4 | |a megaprostheses | |
| 650 | 4 | |a stem length | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ippolito, Joseph A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schneider, Gregory |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Thomson, Jennifer |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Park, Claire |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dias, Rosamaria |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Beebe, Kathleen S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Patterson, Francis R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Benevenia, Joseph |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of surgical oncology |d 1969 |g 129(2024), 5 vom: 14. Apr., Seite 995-999 |w (DE-627)NLM000052930 |x 1096-9098 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:129 |g year:2024 |g number:5 |g day:14 |g month:04 |g pages:995-999 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jso.27587 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 129 |j 2024 |e 5 |b 14 |c 04 |h 995-999 | ||