PURPOSE: Tumor infiltration around the knee joint or skip metastasis, repeated infection sequelae after tumor prosthesis implantation, regional recurrence, and mechanical failure of the megaprosthesis might require combined distal femur and proximal tibia replacement (CFTR). Among the aforementioned situations, there are few reports on the indication, complications, and implant survival of CFTR in temporarily arthrodesed patients who had a massive bony defect on either side of the knee joint to control infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-four CFTR patients were reviewed retrospectively and 13 temporary arthrodesed cases switched to CFTR were extracted. All 13 cases had undergone a massive bony resection on either side of the knee joint and temporary arthrodesis state to control the repeated infection. This paper describes the diagnosis, tumor location, number of operations until CFTR, duration from the index operation to CFTR, survival of CFTR, complications, and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score. RESULTS: According to Kaplan-Meier plot, the 5- and 10-year survival of CFTR was 69.0%±12.8%, 46.0%±20.7%, respectively. Six (46.2%) of the 13 cases had major complications. Three cases underwent removal of the prosthesis and were converted to arthrodesis due to infection. Two cases underwent partial change of the implant due to loosening and periprosthetic fracture. The remaining case with a deep infection was resolved after extensive debridement. At the final follow-up, the average MSTS score of 10 cases with CFTR was 24.6 (21–27). In contrast, the MSTS score of 3 arthrodesis cases with failed CFTR was 12.3 (12–13). The average range of motion of the 10 CFTR cases was 67° (0°–100°). The mean extension lag of 10 cases was 48° (20°–80°). CONCLUSION: Although the complication rates is substantial, conversion of an arthrodesed knee to a mobile joint using CFTR in a patient who had a massive bony defect on either side of the knee joint to control infection should be considered. The patient's functional outcome was different from the arthrodesed one. For successful conversion to a mobile joint, thorough the eradication of scar tissue and creating sufficient space for the tumor prosthesis to flex the knee joint up to 60° to 70° without soft tissue tension.
Arthrodesis ; Cicatrix ; Debridement ; Diagnosis ; Extremities ; Femur ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Joints ; Knee Joint ; Knee ; Limb Salvage ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Osteosarcoma ; Periprosthetic Fractures ; Prostheses and Implants ; Prosthesis Implantation ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Tibia

PURPOSE: Many reconstruction methods have been attempted after an en-bloc resection of the proximal humerus. In particular, the introduction of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has made a breakthrough in the functional recovery of the shoulder. Nevertheless, RSA has limitations when the humeral bone stock loss is significant. In addition, it is unclear if RSA is effective in patients showing failure with non-operative treatment of a proximal humeral tumor. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A reconstruction was performed using an overlapping allograft-RSA composite for 11 patients with a failed proximal humeral construct. Delayed RSA was performed on 6 patients with failed non-operative treatment. The pre- and postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score and the complications were addressed. RESULTS: Overlapping allograft-RSA composite afforded a stable construct in 11 failed proximal humeral reconstructions and the patient's chief complaints were resolved. The mean time to the union of overlapped allograft-host junction was 5.5 months. Average preoperative MSTS score of 20.3 point increased to 25.7 point, postoperatively. Four of the six patients who had RSA within 4 years from the index operation showed arm elevation of more than 90° whereas the remaining 5 patients showed some disability. The complications include one case each of dislocation and aseptic infection, which were resolved by changing the polyethylene liner and scar revision, respectively. None of the 6 patients who underwent delayed RSA after the failure of non-operative treatment showed arm elevation more than 90°. CONCLUSION: An overlapping allograft-RSA composite is a simple and reliable reconstructive modality in patients with massive bone loss. In patients with metastatic cancer necessitating a surgical resection at presentation, early conversion to RSA is recommended to secure functional recovery.
Allografts ; Arm ; Arthroplasty* ; Cicatrix ; Dislocations ; Humans ; Humerus ; Polyethylene ; Shoulder*