Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42170380›Full record

ArticleJSES international2026

Long-term results of 157 cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions for tumors of the humerus: a 30-year experience.

Mathangi Sridharan, Christopher Hamad, Danielle Brown, Rishi Trikha, Joseph Kendal, Nicholas M Bernthal, Lauren Wessel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JSES international, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Mathangi SridharanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Christopher HamadDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Danielle BrownDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California, USA.
Rishi TrikhaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Joseph KendalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Nicholas M BernthalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Lauren WesselDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Limb salvage surgery in the upper extremity requires additional focus on soft-tissue repair and reconstruction to preserve functionality, particularly given the different stability needs of upper extremity reconstructions in terms of range of motion and dexterity. Long-term implant survival data following limb salvage surgery of the upper extremity is heterogenous and largely limited to small series. This study assesses the long-term outcomes and causes of failure of endoprosthetic reconstruction for tumors involving the humerus. Methods: One hundred and fifty-seven consecutive patients who underwent limb salvage surgery via proximal, distal, or total humerus replacement (THR) for musculoskeletal tumors at a single institution between 1980 and 2021 were reviewed. Demographic, oncologic, procedural, and functional outcome data were analyzed with average follow-up of 5.6 years. Implant failure was defined as revision surgery and classified by the Henderson classification; failure excluded expected exchange of modular components. Descriptive statistics and 2-sample Results: A total of 125 proximal humerus, 16 total humerus, and 16 distal humerus endoprostheses were included. The mean age of the cohort at surgery was 43.5 ± 23.9 years. Fifty-eight percent of patients were treated for primary sarcomas. Average follow-up time was 5.7 ± 7.1 years (range: 3 months-31.9 years); 73.3% of the cohort followed up for at least 10 years. There was a 19% rate (30 cases) of implant failure. Failure occurred on average 3.9 ± 4.0 years after surgery. The most common reason for implant failure was tumor progression in 13 cases (8.3%); 5 (3.2%) for soft-tissue failure; 5 (3.2%) for structural failure; 4 for aseptic loosening (2.5%); and 3 for infection (1.9%). 4. Eight percent (8) patients were revised to forequarter amputation, predominantly due to tumor progression. PHRs had an implant-specific survival of 76.0% at 10 years, which exceeded that of distal humerus replacement and THR. THR has lower forward elevation ( Conclusion: The present study confirms the long-term durability of cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions in setting of oncologic reconstruction for massive bone and soft tissue tumors of the humerus. In this series, the most common cause of implant failure requiring revision of the stemmed component in humerus reconstructions is tumor progression, suggesting that oncologic modality of failure is more likely than mechanical failures in this setting.

Indexed as

EndoprosthesisHumerusImplant failureLimb salvageLong-term outcomesReconstruction

Identifiers

PMID42170380
PMCPMC13188085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.