Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Allograft-prosthetic composite versus megaprosthesis in the proximal tibia: what works best?


Müller, Daniel A; Beltrami, Giovanni; Scoccianti, Guido; Cuomo, Pierluigi; Capanna, Rodolfo (2016). Allograft-prosthetic composite versus megaprosthesis in the proximal tibia: what works best? Injury, 47(Suppl 4):S124-S130.

Abstract

Modular megaprosthesis (MP) and allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) are the most commonly used reconstructions for large bone defects of the proximal tibia. The primary objective of this study was to compare the two different techniques in terms of failures and functional results. A total of 42 consecutive patients with a mean age of 39.6 years (range 15-81 years) who underwent a reconstruction of the proximal tibia between 2001 and 2012 were included. Twenty-three patients were given an MP, and 19 patients received an APC. There were nine reconstruction failures after an average follow-up of 62 months: five in the MP group and four in the APC group (p=0.957). The 10-year implant survival rate was 78.8% for the MP and 93.7% for the APC (p=0.224). There were no relevant differences between the two groups in functional results. Both MP and APC are valid and satisfactory reconstructive options for massive bone defects in the proximal tibia. In high-demanding patients with no further risk factors, an APC should be considered to provide the best possible functional result for the extensor mechanism.

Abstract

Modular megaprosthesis (MP) and allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) are the most commonly used reconstructions for large bone defects of the proximal tibia. The primary objective of this study was to compare the two different techniques in terms of failures and functional results. A total of 42 consecutive patients with a mean age of 39.6 years (range 15-81 years) who underwent a reconstruction of the proximal tibia between 2001 and 2012 were included. Twenty-three patients were given an MP, and 19 patients received an APC. There were nine reconstruction failures after an average follow-up of 62 months: five in the MP group and four in the APC group (p=0.957). The 10-year implant survival rate was 78.8% for the MP and 93.7% for the APC (p=0.224). There were no relevant differences between the two groups in functional results. Both MP and APC are valid and satisfactory reconstructive options for massive bone defects in the proximal tibia. In high-demanding patients with no further risk factors, an APC should be considered to provide the best possible functional result for the extensor mechanism.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
19 citations in Web of Science®
20 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

0 downloads since deposited on 16 Feb 2017
0 downloads since 12 months

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Balgrist University Hospital, Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Center
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Emergency Medicine
Health Sciences > Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Language:English
Date:October 2016
Deposited On:16 Feb 2017 15:25
Last Modified:26 Jan 2022 12:28
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0020-1383
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2016.07.043
PubMed ID:27503316