ArticleCureus2026
Femoral Reconstruction Using a Push-Through Prosthesis for Massive Femoral Bone Loss: A Retrospective Case Series and Review of the Literature.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Massive femoral bone loss remains one of the greatest challenges in limb salvage and revision orthopedic surgery. The push-through prosthesis was developed as an alternative to total femoral replacement, allowing preservation of the remaining femoral cortex and its associated muscular attachments; however, clinical evidence regarding its use remains limited. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent femoral reconstruction using a push-through prosthesis at a tertiary referral center between 2006 and 2025. Demographic characteristics, surgical indications, previous procedures, postoperative complications, implant survival, and functional outcomes were analyzed, and the current literature was reviewed. Five patients (mean age, 63.4 years) with massive femoral bone loss following complex reconstructive procedures were included. Surgical indications comprised periprosthetic joint infection (n = 2), complex femoral nonunion (n = 1), mechanical failure of a megaprosthesis (n = 1), and failure of revision total hip arthroplasty (n = 1). At a mean follow-up of more than five years, no cases of aseptic loosening, periprosthetic fracture, prosthetic dislocation, or recurrent infection were observed. No patient required revision surgery, resulting in 100% implant and limb survival. All patients remained ambulatory at final follow-up, although most required walking aids. These findings suggest that the push-through prosthesis is a valuable limb-salvage option for carefully selected patients with massive femoral bone loss when conventional reconstructive techniques are no longer feasible, providing durable implant survival, limb preservation, and satisfactory functional outcomes. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution given the small sample size and the absence of standardized functional outcome measures, highlighting the need for larger multicenter studies.
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.