Kostuj Tanja, Streit Renz, Baums Mike H, Schaper Katharina, Meurer Andrea
Orthopedic University Hospital Friedrichsheim gGmbH, Frankfurt/Main, Germany; Institute for Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University of Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany.
Orthopedic University Hospital Friedrichsheim gGmbH, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Sep;30(9):1592-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.002. Epub 2015 Apr 10.
Use of mega-prostheses is a common option for the treatment of patients with malignant tumors as well as in patients with large osseous defects at the time of revision surgery. No studies have compared the two groups to determine whether there is a relative difference in clinical outcomes. We performed a midterm-outcome-study to evaluate our results in these two patient populations. Deep infection was found more often in our revision group (29.5% vs. 9.1%), however no significant differences in WOMAC-results could be found between the two groups. Surgeons should recognize the high complication rate as well as the differences in results using mega-prostheses in these two distinct groups of patients.
使用大型假体是治疗恶性肿瘤患者以及翻修手术时存在大骨缺损患者的常见选择。尚无研究对这两组患者进行比较以确定临床结果是否存在相对差异。我们进行了一项中期结果研究,以评估这两类患者群体的治疗结果。我们发现翻修组深部感染更为常见(29.5% 对 9.1%),然而两组之间 WOMAC 结果未发现显著差异。外科医生应认识到在这两类不同患者群体中使用大型假体时并发症发生率较高以及结果存在差异。