Skip to main content
Log in

Distal femur and proximal tibia replacement with megaprosthesis in revision knee arthroplasty: a limb-saving procedure

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study was to assess whether using megaprostheses in revision knee arthroplasty procedures allows limb salvage with an acceptable outcome and complication rate, in comparison with other limb-saving procedures.

Methods

Between 2000 and 2010, megaprosthesis implantation was required for non-oncologic indications in 20 patients (21 knees) (average age 73 years). Reconstructions involved the distal femur (n = 15), proximal tibia (n = 4), and both femur and tibia (n = 2). The indications, type, and numbers of previous operations and implants, as well as complications associated with megaprosthesis implantation, were reviewed, and the clinical and radiographic outcomes after an average follow-up period of 34 months (range 10–84 months) were evaluated.

Results

The indications for megaprosthesis implantation were periprosthetic infection (n = 5), fracture (n = 9), nonunion (n = 5), and aseptic loosening (n = 2). The types of implant placed before the megaprosthetic reconstruction were a cemented rotating-hinge arthroplasty (n = 16) and a primary total knee arthroplasty (n = 5). Six patients had an additional osteosynthesis of the distal femur. An average of 3.8 operations (range 1–7) had been carried out before megaprosthesis implantation. Complications developed in 11 patients. The Knee Society Score improved significantly, from 43 (±15) to 68 (±16.8); P < 0.05.

Conclusions

Megaprosthesis implantation in revision knee arthroplasty is an exceptional indication. Despite the high complication rate, the patients can be spared amputation in most cases, and rapid mobilization with full weight-bearing is possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Backstein D, Safir O, Gross A (2006) Management of bone loss: structural grafts in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 446:104–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bauman RD, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD (2009) Limitations of structural allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:818–824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr (2009) Distal femoral replacement in nontumor cases with severe bone loss and instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:485–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Clatworthy MG, Ballance J, Brick GW, Chandler HP, Gross AE (2001) The use of structural allograft for uncontained defects in revision total knee arthroplasty. A minimum five-year review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83A:404–411

    Google Scholar 

  5. Davila J, Malkani A, Paiso JM (2001) Supracondylar distal femoral nonunions treated with a megaprosthesis in elderly patients: a report of two cases. J Orthop Trauma 15:574–578

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Engh GA, Ammeen DJ (1998) Classification and preoperative radiographic evaluation: knee. Orthop Clin North Am 29:205–217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Felix NA, Stuart MJ, Hanssen AD (1997) Periprosthetic fractures of the tibia associated with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 345:113–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gosheger G, Goetze C, Hardes J, Joosten U, Winkelmann W, von Eiff C (2008) The influence of the alloy of megaprostheses on infection rate. J Arthroplast 23:916–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gosheger G, Hillmann A, Lindner N, Rödl R, Hoffmann C, Bürger H, Winkelmann W (2001) Soft tissue reconstruction of megaprostheses using a trevira tube. Clin Orthop Relat Res 393:264–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Haidukewych GJ, Springer BD, Jacofsky DJ, Berry DJ (2005) Total knee arthroplasty for salvage of failed internal fixation or nonunion of the distal femur. J Arthroplast 20:344–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hardes J, Gebert C, Schwappach A, Ahrens H, Streitburger A, Winkelmann W, Gosheger G (2006) Characteristics and outcome of infections associated with tumor endoprostheses. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 126:289–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hardes J, von Eiff C, Streitbuerger A, Balke M, Budny T, Henrichs MP, Hauschild G, Ahrens H (2010) Reduction of periprosthetic infection with silver-coated megaprostheses in patients with bone sarcoma. J Surg Oncol 101:389–395

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harris IE, Leff AR, Gitelis S, Simon MA (1990) Function after amputation, arthrodesis, or arthroplasty for tumors about the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72:1477–1485

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hillmann A, Hoffmann C, Gosheger G, Krakau H, Winkelmann W (1999) Malignant tumor of the distal part of the femur or the proximal part of the tibia: endoprosthetic replacement or rotationplasty. Functional outcome and quality-of-life measurements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:462–468

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA (2008) CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 36:309–332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kawai A, Muschler GF, Lane JM, Otis JC, Healey JH (1998) Prosthetic knee replacement after resection of a malignant tumor of the distal part of the femur. Medium to long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:636–647

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mnaymneh W, Emerson RH, Borja F, Head WC, Malinin TI (1990) Massive allografts in salvage revisions of failed total knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 260:144–153

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mortazavi SM, Kurd MF, Bender B, Post Z, Parvizi J, Purtill JJ (2010) Distal femoral arthroplasty for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25:775–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mow CS, Wiedel JD (1996) Structural allografting in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 11:235–241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Myers GJ, Abudu AT, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Grimer RJ (2007) Endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur for bone tumours: long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:521–526

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Patel NS, Ibrahim DT, Finn HA (2002) Knee extensor mechanism reconstruction with medial gastrocnemius flap. Clin Orthop Relat Res 398:176–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Richards CJ, Garbuz DS, Pugh L, Masri BA (2011) Revision total knee arthroplasty: clinical outcome comparison with and without the use of femoral head structural allograft. J Arthroplast 26:1299–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rorabeck CH, Taylor JW (1999) Classification of periprosthetic fractures complicating total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 30:209–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Rougraff BT, Simon MA, Kneisl JS, Greenberg DB, Mankin HJ (1994) Limb salvage compared with amputation for osteosarcoma of the distal end of the femur. A long-term oncological, functional, and quality-of-life study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:649–656

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Suzuki G, Saito S, Ishii T, Motojima S, Tokuhashi Y, Ryu J (2011) Previous fracture surgery is a major risk factor of infection after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:2040–2044

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wunder JS, Leitch K, Griffin AM, Davis AM, Bell RS (2001) Comparison of two methods of reconstruction for primary malignant tumors at the knee: a sequential cohort study. J Surg Oncol 77:89–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Zuckerman JD, Skovron ML, Koval KJ, Aharonoff G, Frankel VH (1995) Postoperative complications and mortality associated with operative delay in older patients who have a fracture of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77:1551–1556

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors hereby declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steffen Höll.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Höll, S., Schlomberg, A., Gosheger, G. et al. Distal femur and proximal tibia replacement with megaprosthesis in revision knee arthroplasty: a limb-saving procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20, 2513–2518 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-1945-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-1945-2

Keywords

Navigation