Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

L’uso delle megaprotesi nella chirurgia di revisione dell’arto inferiore

The use of megaprostheses in non-oncologic revision surgery of the lower limbs

  • Aggiornamenti
  • Published:
LO SCALPELLO-OTODI Educational

Abstract

Tumor megaprostheses are modular systems commonly used for joint reconstructions following bone resection. In the last two decades, indications on the use of modular prostheses have progressively increased even in non-cancer patients, mainly as a review of implants, in particularly favorable conditions for hip and knee and with severe bone loss. Aim of this study is to define the current indications in the use of megaprostheses as revision implant in non-cancer patients, based on the experience of a reference cancer center and the data reported in the literature.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliografia

  1. Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E et al. (2009) The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Jt Surg Am 91(1):128–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E et al. (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(4):780–785

    Google Scholar 

  3. Callaghan JJ, Salvati EA, Pellicci PM et al. (1985) Results of revision for mechanical failure after cemented total hip replacement, 1979 to 1982. A two to five-year follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg Am 67(7):1074–1085

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gross AE, Allan DG, Leitch KK, Hutchison CR (1996) Proximal femoral allografts for reconstruction of bone stock in revision arthroplasty of the hip. Instr Course Lect 45:143–147

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Roberson JR (1992) Proximal femoral bone loss after total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 23(2):291–302

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rubash HE, Sinha RK, Shanbhag AS, Kim SY (1998) Pathogenesis of bone loss after total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 29(2):173–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Berry DJ, Chandler HP, Reilly DT (1991) The use of bone allografts in two-stage reconstruction after failure of hip replacements due to infection. J Bone Jt Surg Am 73(10):1460–1468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Emerson RH, Malinin TI, Cuellar AD et al. (1992) Cortical strut allografts in the reconstruction of the femur in revision total hip arthroplasty. A basic science and clinical study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 285:35–44

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kantor GS, Osterkamp JA, Dorr LD et al. (1986) Resection arthroplasty following infected total hip replacement arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 1(2):83–89

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chandler HP (1997) Reconstruction of major segmental loss of the proximal femur in revision total hip replacement. Orthopedics 20(9):801–803

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS et al. (1993) Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Br 75(1):14–21

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Haentjens P, De Boeck H, Opdecam P (1996) Proximal femoral replacement prosthesis for salvage of failed hip arthroplasty: complications in a 2–11 year follow-up study in 19 elderly patients. Acta Orthop Scand 67(1):37–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Malkani AL, Paiso JM, Sim FH (2000) Proximal femoral replacement with megaprosthesis. Instr Course Lect 49:141–146

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cameron HU, Hu C, Vyamont D (1997) Hinge total knee replacement revisited. Can J Surg 40(4):278–283

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Cameron HU, Jung YB (1990) Hinged total knee replacement: indications and results. Can J Surg 33(1):53–57

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Choong PF, Sim FH, Pritchard DJ et al. (1996) Megaprostheses after resection of distal femoral tumors. A rotating hinge design in 30 patients followed for 2–7 years. Acta Orthop Scand 67(4):345–351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hui FC, Fitzgerald RH (1980) Hinged total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 62(4):513–519

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kawai A, Muschler GF, Lane JM et al. (1998) Prosthetic knee replacement after resection of a malignant tumor of the distal part of the femur. Medium to long-term results. J Bone Jt Surg Am 80(5):636–647

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shih LY, Sim FH, Pritchard DJ et al. (1993) Segmental total knee arthroplasty after distal femoral resection for tumor. Clin Orthop Relat Res 292:269–281

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sim FH, Chao EY (1981) Hip salvage by proximal femoral replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Am 63(8):1228–1239

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Parvizi J, Sim FH (2004) Proximal femoral replacements with megaprostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 420:169–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Malkani AL, Settecerri JJ, Sim FH et al. (1995) Long-term results of proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic disorders. J Bone Jt Surg Br 77(3):351–356

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Berend KR, Lombardi AV (2009) Distal femoral replacement in nontumor cases with severe bone loss and instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(2):485–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mortazavi SM, Kurd MF, Bender B et al. (2010) Distal femoral arthroplasty for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25(5):775–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Appleton P, Moran M, Houshian S, Robinson CM (2006) Distal femoral fractures treated by hinged total knee replacement in elderly patients. J Bone Jt Surg Br 88(8):1065–1070

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Barrack RL (2001) Evolution of the rotating hinge for complex total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:292–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Springer BD, Hanssen AD, Sim FH, Lewallen DG (2001) The kinematic rotating hinge prosthesis for complex knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:283–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Springer BD, Sim FH, Hanssen AD, Lewallen DG (2004) The modular segmental kinematic rotating hinge for nonneoplastic limb salvage. Clin Orthop Relat Res 421:181–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Maurer SG, Baitner AC, Di Cesare PE (2000) Reconstruction of the failed femoral component and proximal femoral bone loss in revision hip surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 8(6):354–363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Aribindi R, Barba M, Solomon MI et al. (1998) Bypass fixation. Orthop Clin North Am 29(2):319–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Paprosky WG, Lawrence J, Cameron H (1990) Femoral defect classification: clinical application. Orthop Rev 19(Suppl 9):9–17

    Google Scholar 

  32. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ (1998) Classification and preoperative radiographic evaluation: knee. Orthop Clin North Am 29(2):205–217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Whittaker JP, Dharmarajan R, Toms AD (2008) The management of bone loss in revision total knee replacement. J Bone Jt Surg Br 90(8):981–987

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Korim MT, Esler CNA, Ashford RU (2014) Systematic review of proximal femoral arthroplasty for non-neoplastic conditions. J Arthroplast 29(11):2117–2121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Parvizi J, Tarity TD, Slenker N et al. (2007) Proximal femoral replacement in patients with non-neoplastic conditions. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(5):1036–1043

    Google Scholar 

  36. Al-Taki MM, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS (2011) Quality of life following proximal femoral replacement using a modular system in revision THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(2):470–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gebert C, Wessling M, Götze C et al. (2010) The modular universal tumour and revision system (MUTARS®) in endoprosthetic revision surgery. Int Orthop 34(8):1261–1265

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Bertani A, Helix M, Louis ML et al. (2009) Total hip arthroplasty in severe segmental femoral bone loss situations: use of a reconstruction modular stem design (JVC IX). Retrospective study of 23 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95(7):491–497

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sewell MD, Hanna SA, Carrington RW et al. (2010) Modular proximal femoral replacement in salvage hip surgery for non-neoplastic conditions. Acta Orthop Belg 76(4):493–502

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Shih S, Wang J, Hsu C (2007) Proximal femoral megaprosthesis for failed total hip arthroplasty. Chang Gung Med J 30(1):73–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Schoenfeld AJ, Leeson MC, Vrabec GA et al. (2008) Outcomes of modular proximal femoral replacement in the treatment of complex proximal femoral fractures: a case series. Int J Surg 6(2):140–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Colman M, Choi L, Chen A et al. (2014) Proximal femoral replacement in the management of acute periprosthetic fractures of the hip: a competing risks survival analysis. J Arthroplast 29(2):422–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. McLean AL, Patton JT, Moran M (2012) Femoral replacement for salvage of periprosthetic fracture around a total hip replacement. Injury 43(7):1166–1169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lundh F, Sayed-Noor AS, Brosjö O, Bauer H (2014) Megaprosthetic reconstruction for periprosthetic or highly comminuted fractures of the hip and knee. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24(4):553–557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Dean BJF, Matthews JJ, Price A et al. (2012) Modular endoprosthetic replacement for failed internal fixation of the proximal femur following trauma. Int Orthop 36(4):731–734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pour AE, Parvizi J, Slenker N et al. (2007) Rotating hinged total knee replacement: use with caution. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(8):1735–1741

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kavanagh BF (1992) Femoral fractures associated with total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 23(2):249–257

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Sisto DJ, Lachiewicz PF, Insall JN (1985) Treatment of supracondylar fractures following prosthetic arthroplasty of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 196:265–272

    Google Scholar 

  49. Neer CS, Grantham SA, Shelton ML (1967) Supracondylar fracture of the adult femur. A study of one hundred and ten cases. J Bone Jt Surg Am 49(4):591–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Klein GR, Parvizi J, Rapuri V et al. (2005) Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87(8):1777–1781

    Google Scholar 

  51. Höll S, Schlomberg A, Gosheger G et al. (2012) Distal femur and proximal tibia replacement with megaprosthesis in revision knee arthroplasty: a limb-saving procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(12):2513–2518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Suzuki G, Saito S, Ishii T et al. (2011) Previous fracture surgery is a major risk factor of infection after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(12):2040–2044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Windhager R, Schreiner M, Staats K, Apprich S (2016) Megaprostheses in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the knee joint: indication, technique, results and review of literature. Int Orthop (SICOT) 40:935–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Lamagni T (2014) Epidemiology and burden of prosthetic joint infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 69(Suppl 1):5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Younger AS, Duncan CP, Masri BA, McGraw RW (1997) The outcome of two-stage arthroplasty using a custom-made interval spacer to treat the infected hip. J Arthroplast 12(6):615–623

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Hsieh P, Shih C, Chang Y et al. (2004) Two-stage revision hip arthroplasty for infection: comparison between the interim use of antibiotic-loaded cement beads and a spacer prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 86-A(9):1989–1997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Biring GS, Kostamo T, Garbuz DS et al. (2009) Two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip for infection using an interim articulated Prostalac hip spacer: a 10- to 15-year follow-up study. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91(11):1431–1437

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Tsuchiya H, Shirai T, Nishida H et al. (2012) Innovative antimicrobial coating of titanium implants with iodine. J Orthop Sci 17(5):595–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Hardes J, von Eiff C, Streitbuerger A et al. (2010) Reduction of periprosthetic infection with silver-coated megaprostheses in patients with bone sarcoma. J Surg Oncol 101(5):389–395

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27

    Google Scholar 

  61. Saleh KJ, Dykes DC, Tweedie RL et al. (2002) Functional outcome after total knee arthroplasty revision: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplast 17(8):967–977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Ghazavi MT, Stockley I, Yee G et al. (1997) Reconstruction of massive bone defects with allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 79(1):17–25

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Jones RE, Barrack RL, Skedros J (2001) Modular, mobile-bearing hinge total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:306–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Jones RE, Skedros JG, Chan AJ et al. (2001) Total knee arthroplasty using the S-ROM mobile-bearing hinge prosthesis. J Arthroplast 16(3):279–287

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Hillmann A, Hoffmann C, Gosheger G et al. (1999) Malignant tumor of the distal part of the femur or the proximal part of the tibia: endoprosthetic replacement or rotationplasty. Functional outcome and quality-of-life measurements. J Bone Jt Surg Am 81(4):462–468

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Lombardi AV, Mallory TH, Eberle RW, Adams JB (1997) Rotating hinge prosthesis in revision total knee arthroplasty: indications and results. Surg Technol Int 6:379–382

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Pacha-Vicente D, Malik A, Castellet-Feliu E, Nardi-Vilardaga J (2008) Dislocation of rotating-hinge knee prostheses with antidislocation mechanism. J Arthroplast 23(2):299–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Wang CJ, Wang HE (2000) Early catastrophic failure of rotating hinge total knee prosthesis. J Arthroplast 15(3):387–391

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Ward WG, Haight D, Ritchie P et al. (2003) Dislocation of rotating hinge total knee prostheses. A biomechanical analysis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85-A(3):448–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Utting MR, Newman JH (2004) Customised hinged knee replacements as a salvage procedure for failed total knee arthroplasty. Knee 11(6):475–479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Ortopedia ed Ortopedia Oncologica, Università di Padova, Padova, Italia

    Andrea Angelini, Alberto Guerriero, Giulia Trovarelli, Elisa Pala, Antonio Berizzi, Carlo Biz, Silvano Pierluigi Sperotto & Pietro Ruggieri

Authors
  1. Andrea Angelini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alberto Guerriero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giulia Trovarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elisa Pala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Antonio Berizzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carlo Biz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Silvano Pierluigi Sperotto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Pietro Ruggieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pietro Ruggieri.

Ethics declarations

Conflitto di interesse

Gli autori Andrea Angelini, Alberto Guerriero, Giulia Trovarelli, Elisa Pala, Antonio Berizzi, Carlo Biz, Silvano Pierluigi Sperotto e Pietro Ruggieri dichiarano di non avere alcun conflitto di interesse.

Consenso informato e conformità agli standard etici

Tutte le procedure descritte nello studio e che hanno coinvolto esseri umani sono state attuate in conformità alle norme etiche stabilite dalla dichiarazione di Helsinki del 1975 e successive modifiche. Il consenso informato è stato ottenuto da tutti i pazienti inclusi nello studio.

Human and Animal Rights

L’articolo non contiene alcuno studio eseguito su esseri umani e su animali da parte degli autori.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Angelini, A., Guerriero, A., Trovarelli, G. et al. L’uso delle megaprotesi nella chirurgia di revisione dell’arto inferiore. LO SCALPELLO 31, 282–288 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-017-0222-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-017-0222-z

Search

Navigation