Intercalary Prosthetic Reconstruction with Three-Dimensional-Printed Custom-Made Porous Component for Defects of Long Bones with Short Residual Bone Segments After Tumor Resection

Abstract

Background:: Intercalary reconstruction for patients with short residual bone segments remains challenging. Three-dimensional (3D)-printed custom-made porous implants are a promising technique for short-segment fixation in these patients. This study aims to evaluate the efficiency of 3D-printed custom-made porous components (3DCPCs) for short-segment fixation, focusing on prosthesis survivorship, radiographic results, and potential complications.

Methods:: This retrospective study involved 39 patients who underwent intercalary prosthetic reconstruction with 3DCPCs after tumor resection of the femur, tibia, or humerus from June 2015 to October 2020. Segment bone loss involved the femur (n = 15), tibia (n = 16), and humerus (n = 8), leaving 78 residual bone segments. There were 46 short segments requiring 46 3DCPCs and 32 segments with the ability to accommodate 32 off-the-shelf standard uncemented stems for prosthesis fixation. Clinical and functional outcomes were evaluated. Prosthesis-overall survivorship and prosthesis-specific survivorship were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Radiographic results and modes of failure of using this technique were also examined.

Results:: The mean follow-up was 41 months. The prosthesis-overall survivorship was 87.2% and 84.6% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. The prosthesis-specific survivorship was 92.1% and 89.5% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. There was not a substantial difference in prosthesis survivorship among the femur, tibia, and humerus. The average MSTS score was 26.2, ranging from 22 to 28. The radiographic evaluation results revealed excellent or good interface (38/46) in most of the 46 porous components. A total of 38 of 46 bone segments’ remolding demonstrated no change. In total, seven patients (16.3%) had complications requiring further surgery.

Conclusion:: The prosthesis survivorship of using 3DCPCs for short-segment fixation is similar or better compared to other studies involving intercalary prosthetic reconstruction with short-segment fixation. Radiographic evaluation revealed good osteointegration and avoidance of stress shielding. Overall, intercalary prosthetic reconstruction with 3DCPC is a feasible modality for patients with short residual bone segments after tumor resection.

Keywords

3D-printed / intercalary reconstruction / long bones / short-segment fixation

References

[1] Böhler C, Brönimann S, Kaider A, Puchner SE, Sigmund IK, Windhager R, et al. Surgical and functional outcome after Endoprosthetic reconstruction in patients with osteosarcoma of the Humerus. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):16148.

[2] Nakamura T, Matsumine A, Toda Y, Takenaka S, Outani H, Fujiwara T, et al. Long-term results of Kyocera modular limb salvage system after resection of tumors in the distal part of the femur: report from Japanese musculoskeletal oncology group study. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(4):14.

[3] Li Y, Sun Y, Shan HC, Niu XH. Comparative analysis of early follow-up of biologic fixation and cemented stem fixation for femoral tumor prosthesis. Orthop Surg. 2019;11(3):451–459.

[4] Liu Q, He H, Duan Z, Zeng H, Yuan Y, Wang Z, et al. Intercalary allograft to reconstruct large-segment diaphysis defects after resection of lower extremity malignant bone tumor. Cancer Manag Res. 2020;12:4299–4308.

[5] Shehadeh AM, Isleem U, Abdelal S, Salameh H, Abdelhalim M. Surgical technique and outcome of custom joint-sparing endoprosthesis as a reconstructive modality in juxta-articular bone sarcoma. J Oncol. 2019;2019:1–13.

[6] Sanders P, Spierings J, Albergo J, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of intercalary allograft reconstruction for lower-extremity bone tumors. JBJS. 2020;102(12):1042–1049.

[7] Gupta S, Kafchinski L, Gundle K, Saidi K, Griffin AM, Wunder JS, et al. Intercalary allograft augmented with intramedullary cement and plate fixation is a reliable solution after resection of a diaphyseal tumour. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(7):973–978.

[8] Zekry KM, Yamamoto N, Hayashi K, Takeuchi A, Higuchi T, Abe K, et al. Intercalary frozen autograft for reconstruction of malignant bone and soft tissue tumours. Int Orthop. 2017;41(7):1481–1487.

[9] Errani C, Alfaro PA, Ponz V, Colangeli M, Donati DM, Manfrini M. Does the addition of a vascularized fibula improve the results of a massive bone allograft alone for intercalary femur reconstruction of malignant bone tumors in children? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2021;479(6):1296–1308.

[10] Ogura K, Miyamoto S, Sakuraba M, Fujiwara T, Chuman H, Kawai A. Intercalary reconstruction after wide resection of malignant bone tumors of the lower extremity using a composite graft with a devitalized autograft and a vascularized fibula. Sarcoma. 2015;2015:1–8.

[11] Tsuchiya H, Wan S, Sakayama K, et al. Reconstruction using an autograft containing tumour treated by liquid nitrogen. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(2):218–225.

[12] Tsuchiya H, Tomita K, Minematsu K, Mori Y, Asada N, Kitano S. Limb salvage using distraction osteogenesis: a classification of the technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(3):403–411.

[13] Ronga M, Ferraro S, Fagetti A, Cherubino M, Valdatta L, Cherubino P. Masquelet technique for the treatment of a severe acute tibial bone loss. Injury. 2014;45:S111–S115.

[14] Wong TM, Lau TW, Li X, Fang C, Yeung K, Leung F. Masquelet technique for treatment of posttraumatic bone defects. Scientific World Journal. 2014;2014:1–5.

[15] Zekry KM, Yamamoto N, Hayashi K, Takeuchi A, Alkhooly AZA, Abd-Elfattah AS, et al. Reconstruction of intercalary bone defect after resection of malignant bone tumor. J Orthop Sur. 2019;27(1):2309499019832970.

[16] Panagopoulos GN, Mavrogenis AF, Mauffrey C, Lesenský J, Angelini A, Megaloikonomos PD, et al. Intercalary reconstructions after bone tumor resections: a review of treatments. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017;27(6):737–746.

[17] Benevenia J, Kirchner R, Patterson F, Beebe K, Wirtz DC, Rivero S, et al. Outcomes of a modular intercalary Endoprosthesis as treatment for segmental defects of the femur, tibia, and Humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):539–548.

[18] Fuchs B, Ossendorf C, Leerapun T, Sim FH. Intercalary segmental reconstruction after bone tumor resection. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(12):1271–1276.

[19] Guder W, Hardes J, Gosheger G, et al. Ultra-short stem anchorage in the proximal tibial epiphysis after intercalary tumor resections: analysis of reconstruction survival in four patients at a mean follow-up of 56 months. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137(4):481–488.

[20] Zhang T, Wei Q, Zhou H, Jing Z, Liu X, Zheng Y, et al. Three-dimensional-printed individualized porous implants: a new “implant-bone” interface fusion concept for large bone defect treatment. Bioact Mater. 2021;6(11):3659–3670.

[21] Liu W, Shao Z, Rai S, Hu B, Wu Q, Hu H, et al. Three-dimensional-printed intercalary prosthesis for the reconstruction of large bone defect after joint-preserving tumor resection. J Surg Oncol. 2020;121(3):570–577.

[22] Glasser D. The IScOLS radiological implants evaluation system. Limb Salvage-Major Reconstructions in Oncology and Non-tumoral Conditions. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 1991. p. 24–25.

[23] Capanna R, Morris H, Campanacci D, del Ben M, Campanacci M. Modular uncemented prosthetic reconstruction after resection of tumours of the distal femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76(2):178–186.

[24] Henderson ER, Groundland JS, Pala E, Dennis JA, Wooten R, Cheong D, et al. Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review. JBJS. 2011;93(5):418–429.

[25] Tsukushi S, Nishida Y, Hirose T, Nakata E, Nakagawa R, Nakamura T, et al. Short-term clinical outcomes of Kyocera Modular Limb Salvage System designed cementless stems for the endoprosthetic reconstruction of lower extremities: a Japanese Musculoskeletal Oncology Group multi-institutional study. BMC Cancer. 2022;22(1):781.

[26] Bernthal N, Upfill-Brown A, Burke Z, Ishmael CR, Hsiue P, Hori K, et al. Long-term follow-up of custom cross-pin fixation of 56 tumour endoprosthesis stems: a single-institution experience. Bone Joint J. 2019;101(6):724–731.

[27] Stevenson J, Wigley C, Burton H, Ghezelayagh S, Morris G, Evans S, et al. Minimising aseptic loosening in extreme bone resections: custom-made tumour endoprostheses with short medullary stems and extra-cortical plates. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(12):1689–1695.

[28] Calvert GT, Cummings JE, Bowles AJ, Jones KB, Wurtz DL, Randall LR. A dual-center review of compressive osseointegration for fixation of massive endoprosthetics: 2-to 9-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(3):822–829.

[29] Hattrup SJ, Goulding KA, Beauchamp CP. Compressive osseointegration endoprosthesis for massive bone loss in the upper extremity: surgical technique. JSES Open Access. 2018;2(1):34–39.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2023 2023 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.