[The Role of a Modular Universal Tumour and Revision System (MUTARS®) in Lower Limb Endoprosthetic Revision Surgery - Outcome Analysis of 25 Patients].

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] 6. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021 Oct 14;16(1):598. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02749-z. The risk for complications and reoperations with the use of mega prostheses in bone reconstructions. Berger C(1)(2), Larsson S(3), Bergh P(4), Brisby H(3)(4), Wennergren D(3)(4). Author information: (1)Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. christina.berger@vgregion.se. (2)Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Bruna Stråket 11B, 413 45, Gothenburg, Sweden. christina.berger@vgregion.se. (3)Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. (4)Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Bruna Stråket 11B, 413 45, Gothenburg, Sweden. BACKGROUND: Despite a relatively high risk for complications and reoperations, mega prostheses are considered a useful method for reconstruction of bone defects after tumour resections. The total number of reoperations has not previously been described, and little is known about the complication rate of mega prostheses used for other indications than primary bone tumours. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The current retrospective observational study aimed to describe the patient population treated with mega prostheses at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden, during 14 consecutive years, reports the complications leading to reoperation and the number and type of reoperations for different kinds of complications, and reports on implant survival. METHODS: All patients treated with a mega prosthesis, regardless of surgical indication and anatomical location, at Sahlgrenska University Hospital during the period 2006-2019 were identified. The medical records for all patients were reviewed. Data regarding age, sex, diagnosis, site of disease, bone resection length, chemotherapeutical treatment and postoperative complications including infections and oncological outcome, were collected and evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients treated with 116 mega prostheses were included in the study. The predominant indication for primary surgery with a mega prosthesis was sarcoma of either bone or soft tissue (53.5% of the patients). In total 51 prostheses (44%) did not require any reoperation after the primary surgery. The most common reason for reoperation was infection (22%) followed by soft tissue failure (13%). The risk for prosthetic infection was significantly higher in the group of patients operated due to sarcoma compared with all other indications for surgery regardless of surgical site (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The study reveals a total reoperation rate of 56% after reconstructive surgery using mega prostheses. Despite the high reoperation rates, at the end of the study period, 83% of the patients had still a functioning prosthesis. Therefore, the use of mega prostheses can be considered a reliable method for reconstruction of large bone defects in selected patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. © 2021. The Author(s). DOI: 10.1186/s13018-021-02749-z PMCID: PMC8515693