ArticleAnnals of joint2023
Resection and reconstruction of the proximal femur with revision stems: a cost-effective alternative.
Article in Annals of joint, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Modular oncologic megaprosthesis is the standard method for reconstruction after resection of tumors of the proximal femur. These implants have been utilized for either primary tumors or metastatic disease of bone and multiple myeloma. Fixation is based on either cemented or cementless stems, and a collar supporting the body of the prosthesis. For those patients with advanced disease and/or limited life span, a judicious approach should balance the functional expectations, prognosis, and the issue of cost of the surgical procedure and the implant that is selected. Methods: Based on the principles of distal fixation of tapered stems, the authors have utilized implants originally designed for hip revision surgery to reconstruct the proximal femur in 19 patients, after resection because of metastases, multiple myeloma and some aggressive primary tumors. The essentials of the technique consist of distal fixation in the remaining isthmus of the femur by means of tapered stems, impacted in such a way to achieve solid primary fixation, balanced with accurate leg length restoration. Proximally, the implant remains devoid of bone coverage. Results: In this retrospective study, proper distal fixation, leaving the proximal part of the implant uncovered with bone, has resulted in good functional results in mid-term follow-up of patients. Primary fixation has led to secondary bone ongrowth and remodeling, providing secondary fixation. Complications such as instability, loosening and infection are comparable with those associated to the traditional management with mega prosthesis. Conclusions: The utilization of tapered stems for distal fixation after proximal femoral resections has shown reliable results after mid-term follow-up. The method might be considered as a cost-effective alternative for selected patients.
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.