J Korean Bone Joint Tumor Soc.  2013 Dec;19(2):74-77. 10.5292/jkbjts.2013.19.2.74.

The Failure of Polyethylene Lock of MUTARS(R) Distal Femur Tumor Endoprostheses: A Case Report

• Jeong WJ
• Park IH

• KMID: 1961761
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5292/jkbjts.2013.19.2.74

Abstract

The guidelines for the treatment of massive bone defects caused by bone resection due to tumors have changed from amputation to limb salvaging surgery. Limb salvaging surgery using endoprotheses is a well-established procedure. However, Aseptic loosening, infection, and mechanical defect remain significant problems. Among them, we experienced the case with a breakage of polyethylene lock of MUTARS(R) distal femur tumor Endoprostheses.

Keyword

MUTARS(R) distal femur tumor endoprostheses; breakage of polyethylene lock

MeSH Terms

Amputation
Extremities
Femur*
Polyethylene*
Polyethylene

Figure

• 

  Figure 1. (A) The osteolytic lesion(arrow) at medial aspect of left distal femur is observed on knee radiogram. (B) At presentation, the axial T1-weighted enhanced MRI image shows the high signal intensity lesion with soft tissue invasion. The differential diagnosis includes osteosarcoma. (C) The improvement of the osteosarcoma on axial T1-weighted MRI image is demonstrated after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (D) The photograph shows the sagittally sectioned, distal femoral specimen. (E) The immediate postoperative radiogram of limb salvage surgery using Mutars® endoprostheses is shown. (F) The follow-up radiogram reveals a small dense particle (arrow head) on the lateral aspect of femoral condylar component.

• 

  Figure 2. (A) The central breakage (arrow) on LOCK and two saw tracks (arrow head) on the medial part of LOCK are observed. (B) The original LOCK in the Mutars® endoprotheses is demonstrated.

Reference

References

1. Rougraff BT, Simon MA, Kneisl JS, Greenberg DB, Mankin HJ. Limb salvage compared with amputation for osteosarcoma of the distal end of the femur. A longterm oncological, functional, and quality-of-life study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994; 76:649–56.

2. Henderson ER, Groundland JS, Pala E, et al. Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93:418–29.

3. Kotz R, Dominkus M, Zettl T, et al. Advances in bone tumour treatment in 30 years with respect to survival and limb salvage. A single institution experience. Int Orthop. 2002; 26:197–202.

4. Lee SH, Oh JH, Lee KS, Yoo KH, Kim HS. Infection after prosthetic reconstruction in limb salvage surgery. Int Orthop. 2002; 26:179–84.

5. Ahlmann ER, Menendez LR, Kermani C, Gotha H. Survivorship and clinical outcome of modular endoprosthetic reconstruction for neoplastic disease of the lower limb. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88:790–5.

6. Gosheger G, Gebert C, Ahrens H, Streitbuerger A, Winkelmann W, Hardes J. Endoprosthetic reconstruction in 250 patients with sarcoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 450:164–71.

7. Heisel C, Breusch SJ, Schmid G, Bernd L. Lower limb salvage surgery with MUTARS endoprostheses: 2 to 7 year results. Acta Orthop Belg. 2004; 70:142–7.

8. Jeys LM, Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Tillman RM. Periprosthetic infection in patients treated for an orthopaedic oncological condition. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87:842–9.

9. Flint MN, Griffin AM, Bell RS, Ferguson PC, Wunder JS. Aseptic loosening is uncommon with uncemented proximal tibia tumor prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006; 450:52–9.

10. Pala E, Henderson ER, CalabrÒ T, et al. Survival of current production tumor endoprostheses: Complications, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2013; 108:403–8.