Long-term results of alloplasty and endoprosthetics of the knee joint with a tumor lesion of the distal end of the femur. Clinical observation (to the 100th anniversary of the birth of Professor A.S. Imamaliev)

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Alloplasty of the articular ends of bones in cases of tumor lesion with canned grafts was actively used in 1960–1980. A study by A.S. Imamaliev on obtaining and preserving bone grafts and their application in clinical practice played a crucial role. A prospective direction for the development of this method was the use of a graft of the articular end of the bone combined with an endoprosthesis. With the development and improvement of joint replacement, modern designs of oncological endoprostheses have replaced the use of allografts of the articular ends of bones. Despite continuous improvements in the designs of oncological endoprostheses and surgical intervention techniques, the incidence of infectious complications, instability, and mechanical damage of the endoprosthesis in the postoperative period remains high.

AIM: to investigate the complex path of alloplasty of articular bones in a tumor lesion from replacement with a preserved transplant to the use of an oncological endoprosthesis and analyze the difficulties and complications encountered using a clinical observation lasting 45 years. Based on the study of medical histories and radiographs, the results of treatment of a patient with a giant cell tumor of the distal end of the femur were traced from 1979 to 2023.

CLINICAL CASE DESCRIPTION: The use of massive grafts of the articular ends of bones to replace bone defects in cases of tumor lesions restores the anatomical shape and normal interposition of the surrounding tissues. Fusion of the graft with the bone occurs 6–12 months postoperatively. However, achieving a strong connection of the graft with the bone, restoring stability in the joint, and early onset of movements and operated limb loading are challenging. Reconstruction of the graft reduces its mechanical strength and can cause a fracture of the graft, which requires its removal. The combined use of an allograft reinforced and interstitial endoprosthesis enabled operated limb loading and joint movement immediately after the operation. The function of the joint and ability to support the limb were restored; however, fractures in the legs of the endoprosthesis and their loosening in the bones were observed, which required several revision interventions.

CONCLUSION: The use of implants made of composite materials reinforced with modern designs of high-strength wear-resistant endoprostheses will improve the results of treatment of patients with defects in the articular ends of bones.

About the authors

Ivan G. Chemyanov

Russian University of Medicine

Email: ivanchemianov@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2775-9530

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.), assistant professor

Russian Federation, 4 Dolgorukovskaya str., Moscow, 115172

Mikhail V. Parshikov

Russian University of Medicine

Email: parshikovmikhail@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4201-4577
SPIN-code: 5838-4366

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), professor of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Russian Federation, 4 Dolgorukovskaya str., Moscow, 115172

Nikolay V. Yarygin

Russian University of Medicine

Email: jarigin@msmsu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4322-6985
SPIN-code: 3258-4436

MD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), professor, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Russian Federation, 4 Dolgorukovskaya str., Moscow, 115172

Georgiy I. Chemyanov

Russian University of Medicine

Author for correspondence.
Email: georgic@mail.ru
Russian Federation, 4 Dolgorukovskaya str., Moscow, 115172

References

  1. Imamaliev AS. Homoplasty of articular ends of bones. Moscow: Medicina; 1964. 175 p. (In Russ).
  2. Zatsepin ST. Preservation operations for bone tumors. Moscow: Medicina; 1984. 287 p. (In Russ).
  3. Hwang JS, Mehta AD, Yoon RS, Beebe KS. From amputation to limb salvage reconstruction: evolution and role of the endoprosthesis in musculoskeletal oncology. J Orthopaed Traumatol. 2014;15(2):81–86. doi: 10.1007/s10195-013-0265-8
  4. Imamaliev AS, Chemyanov IG, Dadashev HD. Knee arthroplasty during safe operations. In: Tumors of the musculoskeletal system: Сollection of scientific papers WONC of the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences. Trapeznikov NN, Eremina LA, editors. Moscow: B. I.; 1984. Р. 54–58. (In Russ).
  5. Imamaliev AS, Chemyanov IG. Metal-polymer collapsible intercondylar knee joint endoprosthesis and its implantation technique. Orthopedics, traumatology and prosthetics. 1984;(10):48–50. (In Russ).
  6. Balberkin AV, Shavyrin DA. Organ-preserving reconstructive operations for the replacement of bone defects forming the knee joint. Traumatology and orthopedics of Russia. 2011;7(3):13–18. (In Russ). doi: 10.21823/2311–2905-2011-0-3-13-18
  7. Zasulsky DYu, Kulyaba TA, Ptashnikov DA, Grigoriev PV, Mikhailov IM. Analysis of complications after knee replacement due to tumor lesions (20-year experience). Traumatology and orthopedics of Russia. 2013;19(4):24–32. (In Russ). doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2013-4-24-32
  8. Bovkis GYu, Kulyaba TA, Kornilov NN. Compensation of defects of femoral and tibial metaepiphyses during revision knee replacement — methods and results of their application (literature review). Traumatology and orthopedics of Russia. 2016;22(2):101–113. doi: 10.21823/2311–2905-2016-0-2-101-113
  9. Capanna R, Scoccianti G, Frenos F, et al. What was the survival of megaprostheses in lower limb reconstructions after tumor resections? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(3):820–830. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3736-1
  10. Pala E, Trovarelli G, Calabrò T, et al. Survival of Modern Knee Tumor Megaprostheses: Failures, Functional Results, and a Comparative Statistical Analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(3):891–899. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3699-2
  11. Derzhavin VA, Bukharov AV, Yadrina AV, Erin DA. Results of oncological knee replacement in patients with primary and metastatic tumors of the femur and tibia. Genius of orthopedics. 2020;26(3):347–352. (In Russ). doi: 10.18019/1028–4427-2020-26-3-347-352
  12. Henderson ER, O’Connor MI, Ruggieri P, et al. Classification of failure of limb salvage after reconstructive surgery for bone tumours. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(11):1436–1440. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34747
  13. Imamaliev AS, Chemyanov IG. Some biomechanical parameters of the knee joint necessary for the creation of its endoprosthesis. Medical biomechanics. 1986;4:570–576. (In Russ).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Radiographs of the knee joint: a — before, b — after alloplasty of the distal end of the femur.

Download (183KB)
3. Fig. 2. Intercondylar knee joint replacement: a — assembled, b — disassembled.

Download (185KB)
4. Fig. 3. Radiographs of the knee joint: a — before, b — after implantation of an allograft of the distal end of the femur and interstitial knee replacement.

Download (192KB)
5. Fig. 4. Radiographs: a — before, b — after removal of the intercondylar endoprosthesis and implantation of the endoprosthesis of the Sivash knee joint with an elongated leg of the femoral component.

Download (185KB)
6. Fig. 5. Radiographs: a — before, b — after replacing the elongated leg of the femoral component of the Sivash endoprosthesis with its reinforced version.

Download (142KB)
7. Fig. 6. Radiographs: a — before, b — after replacement of the tibial component of the Sivash knee joint endoprosthesis.

Download (188KB)
8. Fig. 7. Radiographs: a — before, b — after implantation of the elongated leg of the knee joint endoprosthesis.

Download (102KB)

Copyright (c) 2024 Eco-Vector

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).