Total elbow arthroplasty for primary and metastatic tumor

R. Casadei, M. De Paolis, G. Drago, Carlo Romagnoli, D. Donati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Prostheses can be used in elbow reconstruction in both primary and metastatic lesions. Several authors have reported their experience with different types of implant, but not with modular prostheses. Hypothesis: Limb salvage using an elbow prosthesis is effective in obtaining good functional results and reliable local tumor control. Material and methods: Forty-seven patients treated at the Rizzoli Institute for elbow neoplasm from 1990 to 2012 were evaluated. There were 30 primary tumors (64%), 24 bone tumors and 6 soft tissue sarcomas, and 17 bone metastases. Elbow reconstruction used a modular prosthesis in 25 patients and a standard prosthesis in 22. Reconstruction was primary in 30 patients and secondary in 17. Results: At last control, 15 (32%) were dead of disease (DOD) at a mean follow-up of 35 months, 12 (25%) were alive with disease (AWD) at a mean follow-up of 29 months, 19 (40%) showed no evidence of disease (NED) at a mean follow-up of 80 months. Early complications were related to unexpected neurological damage, observed in 12 patients (25%): in 5 cases the deficit resolved in a mean 6 months; in the others, no or only partial recovery was observed. Two implants (4%) developed infection: 1 was treated with antibiotic therapy, and the other required implant revision. One implant showing cement extrusion was revised. In 3 patients (6%) radiography showed a radiolucent halo around the stem (2 humeral, 1 ulnar); no measures were taken, as the patients were completely asymptomatic at every follow-up. In 3 patients (6%) partial resorption of the allograft was observed on X-ray, but remained unchanged at last follow-up, without pain or functional impairment. Seven local recurrences (15%) were observed, at a mean of 16 months after surgery; 5 were treated by resection and/or radiotherapy, and 2 by amputation. Mean functional scores on MEPS and MSTS were respectively 84% and 22/30 (73%). Conclusions: Elbow prostheses provided better function in primary than in metastatic tumor. Elbow prosthesis reconstruction after tumor resection is a viable option both for primary and secondary bone neoplasms. Type of study: Therapeutic. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)459-465
Number of pages7
JournalOrthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research
Volume102
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2016

Fingerprint

Elbow
Arthroplasty
Elbow Prosthesis
Prostheses and Implants
Neoplasms
Bone and Bones
Bone Neoplasms
Limb Salvage
Amputation
Radiography
Sarcoma
Allografts
Radiotherapy
Retrospective Studies
X-Rays
Neoplasm Metastasis
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Recurrence
Pain
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Elbow
  • Limb-salvage
  • Metastases
  • Modular prosthesis
  • Prosthesis
  • Tumors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Total elbow arthroplasty for primary and metastatic tumor. / Casadei, R.; De Paolis, M.; Drago, G.; Romagnoli, Carlo; Donati, D.

In: Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research, Vol. 102, No. 4, 01.06.2016, p. 459-465.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Casadei, R. ; De Paolis, M. ; Drago, G. ; Romagnoli, Carlo ; Donati, D. / Total elbow arthroplasty for primary and metastatic tumor. In: Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research. 2016 ; Vol. 102, No. 4. pp. 459-465.
@article{4634d4487499420f9aa20ad79320445c,
title = "Total elbow arthroplasty for primary and metastatic tumor",
abstract = "Background: Prostheses can be used in elbow reconstruction in both primary and metastatic lesions. Several authors have reported their experience with different types of implant, but not with modular prostheses. Hypothesis: Limb salvage using an elbow prosthesis is effective in obtaining good functional results and reliable local tumor control. Material and methods: Forty-seven patients treated at the Rizzoli Institute for elbow neoplasm from 1990 to 2012 were evaluated. There were 30 primary tumors (64{\%}), 24 bone tumors and 6 soft tissue sarcomas, and 17 bone metastases. Elbow reconstruction used a modular prosthesis in 25 patients and a standard prosthesis in 22. Reconstruction was primary in 30 patients and secondary in 17. Results: At last control, 15 (32{\%}) were dead of disease (DOD) at a mean follow-up of 35 months, 12 (25{\%}) were alive with disease (AWD) at a mean follow-up of 29 months, 19 (40{\%}) showed no evidence of disease (NED) at a mean follow-up of 80 months. Early complications were related to unexpected neurological damage, observed in 12 patients (25{\%}): in 5 cases the deficit resolved in a mean 6 months; in the others, no or only partial recovery was observed. Two implants (4{\%}) developed infection: 1 was treated with antibiotic therapy, and the other required implant revision. One implant showing cement extrusion was revised. In 3 patients (6{\%}) radiography showed a radiolucent halo around the stem (2 humeral, 1 ulnar); no measures were taken, as the patients were completely asymptomatic at every follow-up. In 3 patients (6{\%}) partial resorption of the allograft was observed on X-ray, but remained unchanged at last follow-up, without pain or functional impairment. Seven local recurrences (15{\%}) were observed, at a mean of 16 months after surgery; 5 were treated by resection and/or radiotherapy, and 2 by amputation. Mean functional scores on MEPS and MSTS were respectively 84{\%} and 22/30 (73{\%}). Conclusions: Elbow prostheses provided better function in primary than in metastatic tumor. Elbow prosthesis reconstruction after tumor resection is a viable option both for primary and secondary bone neoplasms. Type of study: Therapeutic. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.",
keywords = "Elbow, Limb-salvage, Metastases, Modular prosthesis, Prosthesis, Tumors",
author = "R. Casadei and {De Paolis}, M. and G. Drago and Carlo Romagnoli and D. Donati",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.026",
language = "English",
volume = "102",
pages = "459--465",
journal = "Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research",
issn = "1877-0568",
publisher = "Elsevier Masson",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Total elbow arthroplasty for primary and metastatic tumor

AU - Casadei, R.

AU - De Paolis, M.

AU - Drago, G.

AU - Romagnoli, Carlo

AU - Donati, D.

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - Background: Prostheses can be used in elbow reconstruction in both primary and metastatic lesions. Several authors have reported their experience with different types of implant, but not with modular prostheses. Hypothesis: Limb salvage using an elbow prosthesis is effective in obtaining good functional results and reliable local tumor control. Material and methods: Forty-seven patients treated at the Rizzoli Institute for elbow neoplasm from 1990 to 2012 were evaluated. There were 30 primary tumors (64%), 24 bone tumors and 6 soft tissue sarcomas, and 17 bone metastases. Elbow reconstruction used a modular prosthesis in 25 patients and a standard prosthesis in 22. Reconstruction was primary in 30 patients and secondary in 17. Results: At last control, 15 (32%) were dead of disease (DOD) at a mean follow-up of 35 months, 12 (25%) were alive with disease (AWD) at a mean follow-up of 29 months, 19 (40%) showed no evidence of disease (NED) at a mean follow-up of 80 months. Early complications were related to unexpected neurological damage, observed in 12 patients (25%): in 5 cases the deficit resolved in a mean 6 months; in the others, no or only partial recovery was observed. Two implants (4%) developed infection: 1 was treated with antibiotic therapy, and the other required implant revision. One implant showing cement extrusion was revised. In 3 patients (6%) radiography showed a radiolucent halo around the stem (2 humeral, 1 ulnar); no measures were taken, as the patients were completely asymptomatic at every follow-up. In 3 patients (6%) partial resorption of the allograft was observed on X-ray, but remained unchanged at last follow-up, without pain or functional impairment. Seven local recurrences (15%) were observed, at a mean of 16 months after surgery; 5 were treated by resection and/or radiotherapy, and 2 by amputation. Mean functional scores on MEPS and MSTS were respectively 84% and 22/30 (73%). Conclusions: Elbow prostheses provided better function in primary than in metastatic tumor. Elbow prosthesis reconstruction after tumor resection is a viable option both for primary and secondary bone neoplasms. Type of study: Therapeutic. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.

AB - Background: Prostheses can be used in elbow reconstruction in both primary and metastatic lesions. Several authors have reported their experience with different types of implant, but not with modular prostheses. Hypothesis: Limb salvage using an elbow prosthesis is effective in obtaining good functional results and reliable local tumor control. Material and methods: Forty-seven patients treated at the Rizzoli Institute for elbow neoplasm from 1990 to 2012 were evaluated. There were 30 primary tumors (64%), 24 bone tumors and 6 soft tissue sarcomas, and 17 bone metastases. Elbow reconstruction used a modular prosthesis in 25 patients and a standard prosthesis in 22. Reconstruction was primary in 30 patients and secondary in 17. Results: At last control, 15 (32%) were dead of disease (DOD) at a mean follow-up of 35 months, 12 (25%) were alive with disease (AWD) at a mean follow-up of 29 months, 19 (40%) showed no evidence of disease (NED) at a mean follow-up of 80 months. Early complications were related to unexpected neurological damage, observed in 12 patients (25%): in 5 cases the deficit resolved in a mean 6 months; in the others, no or only partial recovery was observed. Two implants (4%) developed infection: 1 was treated with antibiotic therapy, and the other required implant revision. One implant showing cement extrusion was revised. In 3 patients (6%) radiography showed a radiolucent halo around the stem (2 humeral, 1 ulnar); no measures were taken, as the patients were completely asymptomatic at every follow-up. In 3 patients (6%) partial resorption of the allograft was observed on X-ray, but remained unchanged at last follow-up, without pain or functional impairment. Seven local recurrences (15%) were observed, at a mean of 16 months after surgery; 5 were treated by resection and/or radiotherapy, and 2 by amputation. Mean functional scores on MEPS and MSTS were respectively 84% and 22/30 (73%). Conclusions: Elbow prostheses provided better function in primary than in metastatic tumor. Elbow prosthesis reconstruction after tumor resection is a viable option both for primary and secondary bone neoplasms. Type of study: Therapeutic. Level of evidence: IV, retrospective study.

KW - Elbow

KW - Limb-salvage

KW - Metastases

KW - Modular prosthesis

KW - Prosthesis

KW - Tumors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964355099&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84964355099&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.026

DO - 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.026

M3 - Article

VL - 102

SP - 459

EP - 465

JO - Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research

JF - Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research

SN - 1877-0568

IS - 4

ER -