Observational studyJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2021
The risk for complications and reoperations with the use of mega prostheses in bone reconstructions.
Observational study in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- IL-18 derived from microwave-ablated osteosarcoma facilitates antitumor response.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Article
- Experience of periprosthetic infection in sarcoma patients following megaprosthetic reconstruction.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- Management of periprosthetic proximal femoral fracture of megaprosthesis with limited residual bone stock: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Soft tissue reconstruction using Trevira tube following proximal femur resection and tumorous endoprosthetic replacement.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Developmental Patterns and Risk Factors of Scoliosis After Hemipelvectomy for the Pelvic Bone Tumor.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Functional and Rehabilitative Outcomes of Patients Affected by Bone Cancer of the Upper Limb Treated with MUTARS Prosthesis: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Risk factors for peri-megaprosthetic joint infections in tumor surgery: A systematic review.SICOT-J · 2024Article
- High Risk for Persistent Peri-Prosthetic Infection and Amputation in Mega-Prosthesis Reconstruction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite 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.
methodsAll 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.
resultsOne 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).
conclusionThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.