Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39501229›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024

Joint preservation in revision arthroplasty and intercalary tumour implants using custom stem solutions.

Yannik Hanusrichter, Carsten Gebert, Sven Frieler, Ole Somberg, Marcel Dudda, Arne Streitbuerger, Jendrik Hardes, Martin Wessling

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Yannik HanusrichterDepartment of Tumour Orthopaedics and Revision Arthroplasty, Orthopaedic Hospital Volmarstein, Lothar-Gau-Str. 11, 58300, Wetter, Germany. HanusrichterY@esv.de.
Carsten GebertDepartment of Tumour Orthopaedics and Revision Arthroplasty, Orthopaedic Hospital Volmarstein, Lothar-Gau-Str. 11, 58300, Wetter, Germany.
Sven FrielerDepartment of Tumour Orthopaedics and Revision Arthroplasty, Orthopaedic Hospital Volmarstein, Lothar-Gau-Str. 11, 58300, Wetter, Germany.
Ole SombergDepartment of Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr- University Bochum, RUB, Bochum, Germany.
Marcel DuddaCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, University Hospital of Essen, Essen, Germany.
Arne StreitbuergerCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, University Hospital of Essen, Essen, Germany.
Jendrik HardesCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, University Hospital of Essen, Essen, Germany.
Martin WesslingDepartment of Tumour Orthopaedics and Revision Arthroplasty, Orthopaedic Hospital Volmarstein, Lothar-Gau-Str. 11, 58300, Wetter, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOff-the-shelf stems offer a wide variety of fixation methods for revision arthroplasty and intercalary tumour implants. However, in extensive defects or needed resection with minimal bone stock left, solid fixation is often not feasible with these implants. Custom-made stem solutions (CSS) offer a viable alternative in these cases to achieve joint preservation.

methodsBetween 2017 and 2024 14 patients (15 implants) were treated in a single-centre study. CSS were indicated if the remaining bone stock was deemed insufficient for normal stem fixation due to tumour resection or previous operations. Postoperative analysis was conducted to evaluate the functional outcome as well as revision rates.

resultsImplantation was possible in all cases, during the follow-up of 30 (SD 18; 6-66) months revision was needed in five cases; with one aseptic loosening, one screw loosening and three PJI cases. Mean MSTS score was 24 (SD 5; 17-30).

conclusionCustom-made stem solutions show promising results in extreme cases. Especially as a preservation of the joint is possible, this treatment algorithm should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Indexed as

Prosthesis DesignReoperationAdultAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, HipBone NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHip ProsthesisHumansMaleMiddle AgedProsthesis FailureRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultCustom implantsIntercalary implantsRevision arthroplastyrTHArTKATumor endoprosthesis

Identifiers

PMID39501229
PMCPMC11536619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.