Modified technique using allograft-prosthetic composite in the distal femur after bone tumor resection

Advancements in gradient bone scaffolds: enhancing bone regeneration in the treatment of various bone disorders

Bone scaffolds are widely employed for treating various bone disorders, including defects, fractures, and accidents. Gradient bone scaffolds present a promising approach by incorporating gradients in shape, porosity, density, and other properties, mimicking the natural human body structure. This design offers several advantages over traditional scaffolds. A key advantage is the enhanced matching of human tissue properties, facilitating cell adhesion and migration. Furthermore, the gradient structure fosters a smooth transition between scaffold and surrounding tissue, minimizing the risk of inflammation or rejection. Mechanical stability is also improved, providing better support for bone regeneration. Additionally, gradient bone scaffolds can integrate drug delivery systems, enabling controlled release of drugs or growth factors to promote specific cellular activities during the healing process. This comprehensive review examines the design aspects of gradient bone scaffolds, encompassing structure and drug delivery capabilities. By optimizing the scaffold's inherent advantages through gradient design, bone regeneration outcomes can be improved. The insights presented in this article contribute to the academic understanding of gradient bone scaffolds and their applications in bone tissue engineering.

Revision surgery for periprosthetic fracture of distal femur after endoprosthetic replacement of knee joint following resection of osteosarcoma

Purpose

Periprosthetic fracture (PPF) is one of the severe complications in patients with osteosarcoma and carries the risk of limb loss. This study describes the characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes of this complication.

Methods

Patients were consecutively included who were treated at our institution between 2016 and 2020 with a PPF of distal femur. The treatment strategies included two types: 1) open reduction and internal fixation with plates and screws and 2) replacement with long-stem endoprosthesis and reinforcement with wire rope if necessary.

Results

A total of 11 patients (mean age 12.2 years (9-14)) were included, and the mean follow-up period was 36.5 (21-54) months. Most fractures were caused by direct or indirect trauma (n = 8), and others (n = 3) underwent PPF without obvious cause. The first type of treatment was performed on four patients, and the second type was performed on seven patients. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was 20 (17-23). All patients recovered from the complication, and limb preservation could be achieved.

Conclusion

PPF is a big challenge for musculoskeletal oncologists, particularly in younger patients. Additionally, PPF poses a challenge for orthopedic surgeons, as limb preservation should be an important goal. Hence, internal fixation with plates and endoprosthetic replacement are optional treatment strategies based on fracture type and patient needs.

Limb salvage surgery reconstructive techniques following long-bone lower limb oncological resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Limb salvage surgery (LSS) is now considered the gold standard surgical treatment for lower limb bone sarcomas. However, there is a paucity of literature comparing the various LSS reconstructive options. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare functional outcomes and complications of LSS reconstructive techniques.

METHODS

The primary aim of the meta-analysis was to determine functional outcomes from the pooled data utilizing the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society score (MSTS). Comparisons could then made for this outcome between biological and prosthetic, vascularised and non-vascularised, and prosthetic and composite reconstructions. The secondary aim was to compare complication outcomes of each reconstruction. Standardized mean difference (Cohen's d) and odds ratios were estimated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 785 patients were included. We found structural failure was 75% less likely to occur in prosthetic reconstruction compared to biological (OR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.07-0.79; P = 0.02). We did not find any evidence of difference in function (MSTS score) between vascularised verses non-vascularised reconstructions (Cohen's d = -1.14; 95% CI = -3.06 to 0.78; I2  = 87%). Other analyses comparing complications found no difference between the reconstructive groups.

CONCLUSION

The study found no correlation between functional outcomes and the type of LSS reconstruction. Structural failure was more likely to occur in biological when compared with prosthetic reconstruction. There was no correlation between the incidence of other complications and the type of LSS technique. This suggests a role for improved approaches to reconstruction methods including bioprinting and bioresorbable devices.

Treatment of Recurrent Giant Cell Tumor of Bones: A Systematic Review

The giant cell tumor of bones (GCTB) is a benign bone tumor with high postoperative recurrence potential. No specific treatment protocol has been developed to date in case of tumor recurrence, and the kind of re-operative surgery depends upon the surgeon's preferences. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the second recurrence rate and the respective functional results of the available treatment options applied to recurrent GCTB. Medline/PubMed and Scopus were searched to identify articles published until March 2023. Twelve studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, comprising 458 patients suffering from recurrent GCTB. The overall incidence of second recurrence was 20.5%, at a mean interval of 28.8 months after the first surgery, and it was more evident after intralesional curettage (IC) surgery than en-bloc resection (EBR) (p = 0.012). In the IC group of patients, the second recurrence rate was lower and the functional outcome was greater when polymethylmethacrylate cement (PMMAc) was used as an adjuvant instead of bone grafting (p < 0.001 for both parameters). Reconstruction of the created bone defect after EBR with a structural allograft provided a better outcome than prosthesis (p = 0.028). According to this systematic review, EBR (first choice) and IC with PMMAc (second choice) are the best treatment options for recurrent GCTB.

Design and performance analysis of 3D-printed stiffness gradient femoral scaffold

Studies on 3D-printed porous bone scaffolds mostly focus on materials or structural parameters, while the repair of large femoral defects needs to select appropriate structural parameters according to the needs of different parts. In this paper, a kind of stiffness gradient scaffold design idea is proposed. Different structures are selected according to the different functions of different parts of the scaffold. At the same time, an integrated fixation device is designed to fix the scaffold. Finite element method was used to analyze the stress and strain of homogeneous scaffolds and the stiffness gradient scaffolds, and the relative displacement and stress between stiffness gradient scaffolds and bone in the case of integrated fixation and steel plate fixation. The results showed that the stress distribution of the stiffness gradient scaffolds was more uniform, and the strain of host bone tissue was changed greatly, which was beneficial to the growth of bone tissue. The integrated fixation method is more stable, less stress and evenly distributed. Therefore, the integrated fixation device combined with the design of stiffness gradient can repair the large femoral bone defect well.

Resurfaced allograft-prosthetic composite for distal femur reconstruction in children with bone tumor

INTRODUCTION

Reconstruction of the distal femur in children following resection of bone sarcoma is challenging. The main problem in children is the small size of bone and a possible limb-length discrepancy at the end of skeletal growth secondary to the loss of the physes. We reported the results of a new surgical technique for distal femur reconstruction after bone tumor resection in children.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed 5 patients with distal femoral sarcomas who underwent intra-articular resection and reconstruction with resurfaced allograft-prosthetic composite at a mean follow-up of 70 months. There were 2 males and 3 females, with a mean age of 10 years (range 8-12) at the time of the diagnosis. All patients were affected by high-grade osteosarcoma. The patients' medical records were reviewed for clinical and functional outcomes as well as post-operative complications. The functional evaluation of the patients was done at the end of the follow-up using Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scoring system. The minimal follow-up was 24 months.

RESULTS

At the last follow-up, 4 patients were continuously disease-free. We excluded one patient who died of disease secondary to lung metastases 16 months after the surgery. Complications occurred in 2 of 4 patients at 17 months and 24 months, respectively. One patient developed deep infection who required the removal of the original reconstruction and, once the infection was treated, the patient underwent reconstruction with an expandable prosthesis. An allograft fracture occurred in another of the 4 patients at 24 months after the first surgery, thus the original reconstruction was removed and the patient underwent reconstruction with modular prosthesis. In the two patients who retained the original reconstruction at the time of their latest follow-up, the mean implant survival time was 70 months. These patients had an excellent MSTS score (29.5 points) and walked without support or limitations with an active knee range of motion of > 90° and complete active extension of the knee. No degenerative changes of the articular surface of the proximal tibia and the patella were observed at the time of the last follow-up. Growth of the physis of the proximal tibia was observed in all the patients during follow-up and no angular deformity of the joint was observed. The limb discrepancy was 4 cm and 2 cm, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Resurfaced allograft-prosthetic composite may represent an alternative surgical technique for distal femur reconstruction in children with bone sarcomas. Although its success is limited by high risk of complications, resurfaced allograft-prosthetic composite seems to be a viable option to preserve the bone stock and the physis of the proximal tibia in selected young patients, minimizing a potential limb-length discrepancy at the end of the skeletal growth.

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

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.

Megaprosthesis versus Allograft Prosthesis Composite for massive skeletal defects

Massive skeletal defects are encountered in the setting of tumors necessitating excision, failed total hip arthroplasty with periprosthetic bone loss, periprosthetic fracture, complex trauma, multiple failed osteosynthesis and infection. Reconstruction of the segmental defects poses a tremendous challenge to the orthopaedic surgeons. The goal of osseous reconstruction of these defects is to restore the bone length and function. Currently the most commonly employed methods for reconstruction are either a megaprosthesis or an Allograft Prosthesis Composite (APC). Megaprosthesis, initially created for the treatment in neoplastic pathologies are being used for the non-neoplastic pathologies as well. The longevity of these implants is an issue as majority of the patients receiving them are the survivors of oncologic issue or elderly population, both in which the life expectancy is limited. However, the early complications like instability, infection, prosthetic breakage and fixation failure have been extensively reported in several literatures. Moreover, the megaprostheses are non-biological options preventing secure fixation of the soft tissue around the implant. The Allograft Prosthesis Composites were introduced to overcome the complications of megaprosthesis. APC is made of a revision-type prosthesis cemented into the skeletal allograft to which the remaining soft tissue sleeve can be biologically fixed. APCs are preferred in young and low risk patients. Though the incidence of instability is relatively low with the composites as compared to the megaprosthesis, apart from infection, the newer complications pertaining to APCs are inevitable that includes non-union, allograft resorption, periprosthetic fracture and potential risk of disease transmission. The current review aims to give an overview on the treatment outcomes, complications and survival of both the megaprostheses and APCs at different anatomic sites in both the upper and lower limbs.

What Are the Long-term Results of MUTARS® Modular Endoprostheses for Reconstruction of Tumor Resection of the Distal Femur and Proximal Tibia?

BACKGROUND

Modular endoprostheses are commonly used to reconstruct defects of the distal femur and proximal tibia after bone tumor resection. Because limb salvage surgery for bone sarcomas is relatively new, becoming more frequently used since the 1980s, studies focusing on the long-term results of such prostheses in treatment of primary tumors are scarce.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What proportion of patients experience a mechanical complication with the MUTARS^® modular endoprosthesis when used for tumor reconstruction around the knee, and what factors may be associated with mechanical failure? (2) What are the nonmechanical complications? (3) What are the implant failure rates at 5, 10, and 15 years? (4) How often is limb salvage achieved using this prosthesis?

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2010, endoprostheses were the preferred method of reconstruction after resection of the knee in adolescents and adults in our centers. During that period, we performed 114 MUTARS^® knee replacements in 105 patients; no other endoprosthetic systems were used. Four patients (four of 105 [4%]) were lost to followup, leaving 110 reconstructions in 101 patients for review. The reverse Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate median followup, which was equal to 8.9 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-9.7). Mean age at surgery was 36 years (range, 13-82 years). Predominant diagnoses were osteosarcoma (n = 56 [55%]), leiomyosarcoma of bone (n = 10 [10%]), and chondrosarcoma (n = 9 [9%]). In the early period of our study, we routinely used uncemented uncoated implants for primary reconstructions. Later, hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated implants were the standard. Eighty-nine reconstructions (89 of 110 [81%]) were distal femoral replacements (78 uncemented [78 of 89 {88%}, 42 of which were HA-coated [42 of 78 {54%}]) and 21 (21 of 110 [19%]) were proximal tibial replacements. In 26 reconstructions (26 of 110 [24%]), the reconstruction was performed for a failed previous reconstruction. We used a competing risk model to estimate the cumulative incidence of implant failure.

RESULTS

Complications of soft tissue or instability occurred in seven reconstructions (seven of 110 [6%]). With the numbers we had, for uncemented distal femoral replacements, we could not detect a difference in loosening between revision (five of 17 [29%]) and primary reconstructions (eight of 61 [13%]) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.72; 95% CI, 0.55-5.38; p = 0.354). Hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented implants had a lower risk of loosening (two of 42 [5%]) than uncoated uncemented implants (11 of 36 [31%]) (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.05-1.06; p = 0.060). Structural complications occurred in 15 reconstructions (15 of 110 [14%]). Infections occurred in 14 reconstructions (14 of 110 [13%]). Ten patients had a local recurrence (10 of 101 [10%]). With failure for mechanical reasons as the endpoint, the cumulative incidences of implant failure at 5, 10, and 15 years were 16.9% (95% CI, 9.6-24.2), 20.7% (95% CI, 12.5-28.8%), and 37.9% (95% CI, 16.1-59.7), respectively. We were able to salvage some of the failures so that at followup, 90 patients (90 of 101 [89%]) had a MUTARS^® in situ.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no system has yet proved ideal to restore normal function and demonstrate long-term retention of the implant, MUTARS^® modular endoprostheses represent a reliable long-term option for knee replacement after tumor resection, which seems to be comparable to other modular implants available to surgeons. Although the number of patients is relatively small, we could demonstrate that with this prosthesis, an uncemented HA-coated implant is useful in achieving durable fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Cost-utility of osteoarticular allograft versus endoprosthetic reconstruction for primary bone sarcoma of the knee: A markov analysis

BACKGROUND

The most cost-effective reconstruction after resection of bone sarcoma is unknown. The goal of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of osteoarticular allograft to endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal tibia or distal femur.

METHODS

A Markov model was used. Revision and complication rates were taken from existing studies. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates and implant prices. Health-state utilities were derived from the Health Utilities Index 3 survey with additional assumptions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were used with less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) considered cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses were performed for comparison over a range of costs, utilities, complication rates, and revisions rates.

RESULTS

Osteoarticular allografts, and a 30% price-discounted endoprosthesis were cost-effective with ICERs of $92.59 and $6 114.77. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed discounted endoprostheses were favored if allografts cost over $21 900 or endoprostheses cost less than $51 900. Allograft reconstruction was favored over discounted endoprosthetic reconstruction if the allograft complication rate was less than 1.3%. Allografts were more cost-effective than full-price endoprostheses.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoarticular allografts and price-discounted endoprosthetic reconstructions are cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis, using plausible complication and revision rates, favored the use of discounted endoprostheses over allografts. Allografts are more cost-effective than full-price endoprostheses.