Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{531b33f0d2e248ebb8dc9b12134cef18,
title = "Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study",
abstract = "Background and objectives: Endoprosthesis is considered a durable implant for treating metastatic bone disease of the proximal femur (MBDf).Objectives: • What is the revision risk after surgery for MBDf using endoprosthesis versus internal fixation?• When do patients with MBDf treated with endoprosthesis restore quality of life (QoL) and how long time does it take to rehabilitate functional outcome?Methods: A prospective, population-based, multicentre study of 110 patients. Patients were followed for a minimum of two years after surgery. No patients were lost to implant failure nor survival follow-up.Results: Forty-four patients were treated with internal fixation and 66 patients received endoprostheses. Two-year implant failure risk for internal fixation was 7% (95CI: 0-14%) versus 2% (95CI: 0-5%) for endoprostheses (p = 0.058).Eq-5D improved to the same level as one month prior to surgery six-weeks after surgery, and the score improved further six months after surgery (median score from 0.603 to 0.694, p = 0.007). MSTS score increased from 12 points after surgery to 23 points six-months after surgery (p<0.001).Conclusions: Endoprosthesis for treatment of MBDf results in low implant failure rate. Patients are satisfied with the functional outcome. QoL is restored six-weeks after surgery. Authors advocate for caution using internal fixation for MBDf due to findings of a possible high early postoperative revision risk.",
author = "S{\o}rensen, {Michala Skovlund} and Horstmann, {Peter Frederik} and Klaus Hinds{\o} and Petersen, {Michael M{\o}rk}",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2019 The Authors.",
year = "2019",
month = dec,
doi = "10.1016/j.jbo.2019.100264",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "100264",
journal = "Journal of Bone Oncology",
issn = "2212-1366",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study

AU - Sørensen, Michala Skovlund

AU - Horstmann, Peter Frederik

AU - Hindsø, Klaus

AU - Petersen, Michael Mørk

N1 - © 2019 The Authors.

PY - 2019/12

Y1 - 2019/12

N2 - Background and objectives: Endoprosthesis is considered a durable implant for treating metastatic bone disease of the proximal femur (MBDf).Objectives: • What is the revision risk after surgery for MBDf using endoprosthesis versus internal fixation?• When do patients with MBDf treated with endoprosthesis restore quality of life (QoL) and how long time does it take to rehabilitate functional outcome?Methods: A prospective, population-based, multicentre study of 110 patients. Patients were followed for a minimum of two years after surgery. No patients were lost to implant failure nor survival follow-up.Results: Forty-four patients were treated with internal fixation and 66 patients received endoprostheses. Two-year implant failure risk for internal fixation was 7% (95CI: 0-14%) versus 2% (95CI: 0-5%) for endoprostheses (p = 0.058).Eq-5D improved to the same level as one month prior to surgery six-weeks after surgery, and the score improved further six months after surgery (median score from 0.603 to 0.694, p = 0.007). MSTS score increased from 12 points after surgery to 23 points six-months after surgery (p<0.001).Conclusions: Endoprosthesis for treatment of MBDf results in low implant failure rate. Patients are satisfied with the functional outcome. QoL is restored six-weeks after surgery. Authors advocate for caution using internal fixation for MBDf due to findings of a possible high early postoperative revision risk.

AB - Background and objectives: Endoprosthesis is considered a durable implant for treating metastatic bone disease of the proximal femur (MBDf).Objectives: • What is the revision risk after surgery for MBDf using endoprosthesis versus internal fixation?• When do patients with MBDf treated with endoprosthesis restore quality of life (QoL) and how long time does it take to rehabilitate functional outcome?Methods: A prospective, population-based, multicentre study of 110 patients. Patients were followed for a minimum of two years after surgery. No patients were lost to implant failure nor survival follow-up.Results: Forty-four patients were treated with internal fixation and 66 patients received endoprostheses. Two-year implant failure risk for internal fixation was 7% (95CI: 0-14%) versus 2% (95CI: 0-5%) for endoprostheses (p = 0.058).Eq-5D improved to the same level as one month prior to surgery six-weeks after surgery, and the score improved further six months after surgery (median score from 0.603 to 0.694, p = 0.007). MSTS score increased from 12 points after surgery to 23 points six-months after surgery (p<0.001).Conclusions: Endoprosthesis for treatment of MBDf results in low implant failure rate. Patients are satisfied with the functional outcome. QoL is restored six-weeks after surgery. Authors advocate for caution using internal fixation for MBDf due to findings of a possible high early postoperative revision risk.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbo.2019.100264

DO - 10.1016/j.jbo.2019.100264

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 31871883

VL - 19

SP - 100264

JO - Journal of Bone Oncology

JF - Journal of Bone Oncology

SN - 2212-1366

ER -

ID: 59373583