Larger stem to bone diameter ratio predicts lower cemented endoprosthesis failure

• Published in: Journal of surgical oncology 2024-04, Vol.129 (5), p.995-999
• Main Authors: Kadkoy, Yazan, Ippolito, Joseph A., Schneider, Gregory, Thomson, Jennifer, Park, Claire, Dias, Rosamaria, Beebe, Kathleen S., Patterson, Francis R., Benevenia, Joseph
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: aseptic loosening; endoprosthesis failure; endoprosthetic reconstruction; implant failure; megaprostheses; stem length
• ISSN: 0022-4790; 1096-9098
• DOI: 10.1002/jso.27587

Background and Objectives With continued advances in treatment options, patients with endoprosthetic reconstruction are living longer and consequently relying upon their devices for a longer duration. Major causes of endoprosthesis failure include aseptic loosening and mechanical failure. In the setting of tumor resection, loss of bone stock and use of radiation therapy increase the risk for these complications. As such, considerations of remaining native bone and stem length and diameter may be increasingly important. We asked the following questions: (1) What was the overall rate of endoprosthesis failure at a minimum of 5‐year follow‐up? (2) Does resection length increase implant failure rates? (3) Does implant size and its ratio to cortical width of bone alter implant failure rates? Methods We retrospectively analyzed patient outcomes at a single institution between the years of 1999−2022 who underwent cemented endoprosthetic reconstruction at the hip or knee and identified 150 patients. Of these 150, 55 had a follow‐up of greater than 5 years and were used for analysis. Radiographs of these patients at time of surgery were assessed and measured for resection length, bone diameter, stem diameter, and remaining bone length. Resection percentage, and stem to bone diameter ratios were then calculated and their relationship to endoprosthesis failure were analyzed. Results Patients in this cohort had a mean age of 55.8, and mean follow‐up of 59.96 months. There were 78 distal femoral replacements (52%), 16 proximal femoral replacements (10.7%), and 56 proximal tibial replacements (37.3%). There were five patients who experienced aseptic loosening and six patients who experienced mechanical failure. Patients with implant failure had a smaller mean stem to bone diameter (36% vs. 44%; p = 0.002). A stem to bone diameter of 40% appeared to be a breaking point between success and failure in this series, with 90% of patients with implant failure having a stem: bone ratio less than 40%. Stem to bone ratio less than 40% increased risk for failure versus stems that were at least 40% the diameter of bone (6/19 [31.6%] vs. 0/36 [0%]; odds ratio 0.68; p