Advertisement

Optimal Design in Tumor Prostheses: Application of Extracortical Bone Bridging and Ingrowth Fixation Principle

  • Edmund Y. S. Chao

Abstract

The utilization of custom-designed segmental bone and joint replacement prostheses in tumor surgery has been a viable option for quite some time [1–4]. However, the clinical results and prosthetic device performance still require improvements, especially in active patients with greater functional demands. The associated poor clinical results were mainly due to implant failure through fracture, loosening, dislocation, and infection. For conditions of massive bone defect, relatively smooth and straight cortex, and large bending torsional loads, traditional methods of implant fixation face a grim outlook in this class of bone and joint replacement. The lack of normal soft tissue coverage and constraint make the joint less stable, which contributes to poor functional results and increases the propensity of stem loosening. Other problems associated with custom prosthetic replacement include the lack of interchangeability, limited availability of the implant components at the time of surgery, improper size and dimension, length of time required for implant fabrication, and high cost.

Keywords

Porous Coating Segmental Bone Autogenous Bone Graft Replacement Prosthesis Cement Fixation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Campanna R, Van Horn JR, Biagini R, Ruggieri R, Bettelli G, Sola G, Campanacci M (1986) A humeral modular prosthesis for bone tumor surgery. A study of 56 cases. Int Orthop 10 (4): 231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chao EYS, Ivins JC (1983) Tumor prostheses for bone and joint reconstruction. Thieme-Stratton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sim FH, Chao EYS (1981) Hip salvage for proximal femoral replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 63: 1228–1239Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sim FH, Chao EYS (1979) Prosthetic replacement of the knee and a large segment of the femur or tibia. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 61: 887–892Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kotz R, Ritschl P, Trachtenbrodt J (1986) A modular and tibia reconstruction system. Orthopedics 9 (12): 1639–1652PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chao EYS (1989) A composite fixation principle for modular segmental defect replacement (SDR) prostheses. Bone tumors: Evaluation and treatment. Orthop Clin North Am 20 (3): 439–453PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chao EYS, Sim FH (1985) Modular prosthetic system for segmental bone and joint replacement after tumor resection. Orthopedics 8: 641–651PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dai KR, An KN, Hein T, Nakajima I, Chao EYS (1985) Geometric and biomechanical analysis of the human femur. Transactions of 31st Annual Meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society, p 99Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nakao Y, Dueland RT, Turner RT, Chao EYS (1990) An ultrastructural study of the biologic mechanism of extracortical bone bridging over porous-coated segmental bone prosthesis. Transactions of 36th Annual Meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society, p 482Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heck DA, Nakajima I, Chao EYS, Kelly PJ (1986) The effect of immobilization on biologic ingrowth into porous titanium fibermetal prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 68: 118–126Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nakajima I, Dai KR, Kelly PJ, Chao EYS (1985) The effect of age on tissue incorporation into Ti fibermetal segmental bone prostheses — an experimental study in canine models. Transactions of 31st Annual Meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society, p 193Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Okada Y, Suka T, Sim FH, Gorski JP, Chao EYS (1988) Comparison of bone segmental prostheses with different porous coatings for extracortical fixation. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 70 (2): 160–172Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wippermann BW, Hsu RWW, Wilkins RM, Chao EYS (1989) Autogenous cortical graft versus demineralized bone matrix in achieving extracortical bone bridging fixation of segmental prostheses. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Limb Salvage, September 6–9, Saint-Malo, FranceGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chin HC, Frassica FJ, Markel MD, Frassica DA, Schray MF, Sim FH, Chao EYS (1989) The effect of therapeutic irradiation on bone ingrowth and extracortical bone formation in porous-coated prosthetic components. Transactions of 35th Annual Meeting of the Orthopedic Research Society, p 555Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heck DA, Chao EYS, Sim FH, Pritchard DJ, Shives TC (1986) Titanium fibermetal segmental replacement prostheses. Clin Orthop 204: 266–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sim FH, Beauchamp CP, Chao EYS (1987) Reconstruction of musculoskeletal defects about the knee for tumor. Clin Orthop 221: 188–201PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edmund Y. S. Chao
    • 1
  1. 1.Biomechanics Laboratory/Department of OrthopedicsMayo Clinic/Mayo FoundationRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations