Deep infection in tumor endoprosthesis around the knee: a multi-institutional study by the Japanese musculoskeletal oncology group

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Shoichi Ichimura⁴  Kazuo Mochizuki⁴  Akira Kawai²  Nobuyuki Hashimoto⁶  Nobuhito Araki³  Takafumi Ueda¹  Hideo Morioka⁵  Takeshi Morii⁴ 

[1]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka National Hospital, Osaka, Japan

[2]Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan

[3]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan

[4]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyorin University, 6-20-2, Shinkawa, Mitaka, Tokyo 181-8611, Japan

[5]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan

[6]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan

关键词: Knee;    Endoprosthesis;    Bone tumor;    Infection;   

Others  :  1134048
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-14-51

 received in 2012-04-12, accepted in 2013-01-24,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The incidence of endoprosthesis failure has been well studied, but few studies have described the clinical characteristics of deep infection in tumor prostheses. This study aimed to analyze the characteristics of deep infection in tumor endoprostheses around the knee.

Methods

We analyzed clinical data of 57 patients with deep infections involving tumor endoprostheses around the knee enrolled from the Japanese Musculoskeletal Oncology Group. Profile of clinical presentation including time between surgery and infection, initial symptoms/blood tests and microbial cultures was evaluated. In addition pre-, intra-, and postoperative clinical factors influencing clinical presentation and treatment outcomes of infections were analyzed.

Results

Mean interval between the initial operation and diagnosis was 13 months, and mean time required for infection control was 12 months. The most common pathogen was Staphylococcus. Infection control rates were significantly higher when prostheses were removed rather than salvaged. Ten-year prosthesis survival and limb salvage rates were 41.6% and 75.6%, respectively. Analysis of underlying clinical factors suggested that soft-tissue condition significantly influenced the duration of the infection control period and likelihood of limb salvage.

Conclusions

Infection control is a prolonged process. Deep infection frequently results in amputation or prosthesis loss. Intensive analysis of clinical characteristics may aid infection control.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Morii et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 5.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Henderson ER, Groundland JS, Pala E, Dennis JA, Wooten R, Cheong D, Windhager R, Kotz RI, Mercuri M, Funovics PT, Hornicek FJ, Temple HT, Ruggieri P, Letson GD: Failure mode classification for tumor endoprostheses: retrospective review of five institutions and a literature review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011, 93:418-429.
• [2]Hardes J, Gebert C, Schwappach A, Ahrens H, Streitburger A, Winkelmann W, Gosheger G: Characteristics and outcome of infections associated with tumor endoprostheses. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2006, 126:289-296.
• [3]Shehadeh A, Noveau J, Malawer M, Henshaw R: Late complications and survival of endoprosthetic reconstruction after resection of bone tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010, 468:2885-2895.
• [4]Schwartz AJ, Kabo JM, Eilber FC, Eilber FR, Eckardt JJ: Cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal tibia: how long do they last? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010, 468:2875-2884.
• [5]Song WS, Kong CB, Jeon DG, Cho WH, Kim JR, Cho Y, Lee SY: The impact of amount of bone resection on uncemented prosthesis failure in patients with a distal femoral tumor. J Surg Oncol 2011, 104:192-197.
• [6]Kinkel S, Lehner B, Kleinhans JA, Jakubowitz E, Ewerbeck V, Heisel C: Medium to long-term results after reconstruction of bone defects at the knee with tumor endoprostheses. J Surg Oncol 2010, 101:166-169.
• [7]Heisel C, Kinkel S, Bernd L, Ewerbeck V: Megaprostheses for the treatment of malignant bone tumours of the lower limbs. Int Orthop 2006, 30:452-457.
• [8]Morii T, Yabe H, Morioka H, Beppu Y, Chuman H, Kawai A, Takeda K, Kikuta K, Hosaka S, Yazawa Y, Takeuchi K, Anazawa U, Mochizuki K, Satomi K: Postoperative deep infection in tumor endoprosthesis reconstruction around the knee. J Orthop Sci 2010, 15:331-339.
• [9]Jeys LM, Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Tillman RM: Periprosthetic infection in patients treated for an orthopaedic oncological condition. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:842-849.
• [10]Jeys LM, Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Tillman RM: Risk of amputation following limb salvage surgery with endoprosthetic replacement, in a consecutive series of 1261 patients. Int Orthop 2003, 27:160-163.
• [11]Kawaguchi N, Matumoto S, Manabe J: New method of evaluating the surgical margin and safety margin for musculoskeletal sarcoma, analysed on the basis of 457 surgical cases. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1995, 121:555-563.
• [12]Mangram AJ, Horan TC, Pearson ML, Silver LC, Jarvis WR: Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Centers for disease control and prevention (CDC) hospital infection control practices advisory committee. Am J Infect Control 1999, 27:97-132.
• [13]Myers GJ, Abudu AT, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Grimer RJ: The long-term results of endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal tibia for bone tumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89:1632-1637.
• [14]Myers GJ, Abudu AT, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Grimer RJ: Endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur for bone tumours: long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007, 89:521-526.
• [15]Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Sneath RS, Walker PS, Unwin PS, Shewell PC: Endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal tibia. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999, 81:488-494.
• [16]Kawai A, Lin PP, Boland PJ, Athanasian EA, Healey JH: Relationship between magnitude of resection, complication, and prosthetic survival after prosthetic knee reconstructions for distal femoral tumors. J Surg Oncol 1999, 70:109-115.
• [17]Ahlmann ER, Menendez LR, Kermani C, Gotha H: Survivorship and clinical outcome of modular endoprosthetic reconstruction for neoplastic disease of the lower limb. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006, 88:790-795.
• [18]Rao K, Lahiri A, Peart FC: Role of staged endoprosthetic revision with flap cover for limb salvage in endoprosthetic failure. Int Orthop 2006, 30:473-477.
• [19]Holzer G, Windhager R, Kotz R: One-stage revision surgery for infected megaprostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997, 79:31-35.
• [20]Funovics PT, Hipfl C, Hofstaetter JG, Puchner S, Kotz RI, Dominkus M: Management of septic complications following modular endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur. Int Orthop 2011, 35:1437-1444.
• [21]Grimer RJ, Belthur M, Chandrasekar C, Carter SR, Tillman RM: Two-stage revision for infected endoprostheses used in tumor surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002, 395:193-203.