0
Scientific Articles   |    
Proximal Femoral Replacement in Patients with Non-Neoplastic Conditions
Javad Parvizi, MD, FRCS1; T. David Tarity, BS1; Nicholas Slenker, BA1; Frazier Wade, MD1; Rachel Trappler, BS1; William J. Hozack, MD1; Franklin H. Sim, MD2
1 Rothman Institute of Orthopaedics, Thomas Jefferson Hospital, 925 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107. E-mail address for J. Parvizi: Parvj@aol.com
2 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street S.W., Rochester, MN 55905
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2007; 89:1036-1043  doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00241
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Numerous factors may give rise to the loss of femoral bone stock that can be encountered in revision hip arthroplasty. Proximal femoral replacement is an option for the treatment of severe proximal femoral bone loss. In this study, we sought to determine the outcome of reconstructive surgery with the use of a modular proximal femoral replacement (a so-called megaprosthesis) in patients with proximal femoral bone loss due to non-neoplastic conditions.

Methods: A review of computerized databases from two institutions identified forty-eight patients with a mean age of 73.8 years who had undergone the placement of a modular megaprosthesis with or without bone-grafting. The indication for proximal femoral replacement was a periprosthetic fracture in twenty patients, reimplantation because of a deep infection in thirteen, a failed arthroplasty in thirteen, nonunion of an intertrochanteric fracture in one, and radiation-induced osteonecrosis with a subtrochanteric fracture in one. Three patients died before the minimum two-year follow-up interval had elapsed, and two additional patients were lost to follow-up. The mean duration of follow-up for the remaining study group of forty-three patients was 36.5 months.

Results: At the time of follow-up, there was a significant improvement in function as measured with the Harris hip score (p < 0.05). The proximal femoral replacement achieved an excellent or good functional outcome in twenty-two of the forty-three hips. The functional outcome was found to be fair in ten hips and poor in the remaining eleven. Ten patients required a reoperation or revision because of at least one complication. With revision used as the end point, the survivorship of the implant was 87% at one year and 73% at five years.

Conclusions: Patients with severely compromised bone stock in whom the use of a conventional prosthesis is precluded because of an inability to achieve adequate fixation may be candidates for proximal femoral replacement. Our short-term results suggest that this is a viable salvage procedure for these patients.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Mesenchymal stem cell transplantation to promote bone healing.
    Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society: Issue date- 2012 Jan 6
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    Maine - Central Maine Medical Center