ReviewJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Functional Outcomes and Complications of Megaprosthetic Reconstruction in Limb-Salvage Surgery for Musculoskeletal Tumors: A Scoping Review.
Review in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Limb salvage surgery (LSS) has replaced amputation in most cases of primary malignant bone tumors, achieving comparable oncologic control while preserving limb function and quality of life. Among reconstruction techniques, megaprosthetic replacement offers immediate stability, modular flexibility, and early rehabilitation potential. However, variability in tumor site, prosthesis design, and post-operative care continues to influence functional outcomes and complication rates across regions. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive scoping review of studies published between 2014 and 2025 was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and EBSCO databases. Nineteen studies involving more than 600 patients who underwent LSS with megaprosthetic reconstruction for primary or recurrent bone tumors were analysed. Extracted data included patient demographics, tumor type, prosthesis characteristics, functional outcomes (musculoskeletal tumor society [MSTS], Toronto extremity salvage score [TESS], range of motion [ROM], gait parameters, Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS], return to work), and complications such as infection, mechanical failure, and aseptic loosening. Results: Functional recovery was favourable, with mean MSTS and TESS scores ranging from 66% to 89%. Distal femur reconstructions demonstrated the highest functional outcomes (>80%), while proximal femur and humerus reconstructions showed slightly reduced scores (66-73%) due to soft-tissue limitations and reduced mobility. Improvements in ROM, gait symmetry, and KPS indicated successful restoration of biomechanics and independence. Complications included deep infections (5-24%), aseptic loosening (6-15%), and mechanical failures (up to 12.5%), most commonly in expandable implants. Despite these, limb retention exceeded 88% at 5 years, and long-term implant survival remained encouraging across different centers. Socioeconomic disparities and limited access to rehabilitation were identified as key factors affecting recovery and patient satisfaction. Conclusion: Megaprosthetic reconstruction remains a cornerstone of modern LSS, providing durable oncologic safety and functional restoration. Early physiotherapy, infection prevention, and careful prosthesis selection are vital for optimising outcomes. Future studies should include standardized reporting of functional and psychosocial parameters and integrate socioeconomic factors to ensure equitable, patient-centred recovery worldwide.
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.