Liu Hongyuan, Fang Xiang, Yu Zeping, Lang Yun, Xiong Yan, Duan Hong
Department of Orthopedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 37 Guo Xue Lane, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Department of Orthopedics, People's Hospital of Deyang City, Deyang, 618000, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
Int Orthop. 2018 Nov;42(11):2691-2698. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-3922-y. Epub 2018 Apr 17.
The purpose of this study was to explore the indications for the two most frequently applied surgical procedures for benign lesions in the proximal femur.
We retrospectively reviewed 142 patients with benign lesions in the proximal femur from January 2010 to January 2015. Internal fixation (IF) was adopted in 110 patients, while endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) was applied in 32 patients. Clinical data, including operation time, blood loss, hospitalization time, and hospitalization expenses, were compared between the groups. Limb mobilization was evaluated by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score-93 (MSTS-93) and Harris Hip Score (HHS). Local recurrences and complications were statistically compared.
The average follow-up was 66 months (range 32-84 months). In the EPR group, operation time and hospitalization time were significantly shorter (p < 0.05 and p < 0.05, respectively), while blood loss and hospitalization expenses were significantly higher (p < 0.05 and p < 0.05, respectively). Functional outcomes of the MSTS-93 and HHS were higher at the three week follow-up in the EPR group (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively) but lower at 6 months (p = 0.031 and p = 0.042, respectively). No differences were observed in the two scores at three months (p = 0.261 and p = 0.134, respectively). Local recurrence and complication rates were similar in the two groups (p = 0.895 and p = 0.942, respectively).
The strategy for benign proximal femur lesions should depend on the site, size, initial diagnosis, and thinning degree of cortical bone. IF and EPR both result in satisfactory local control and functional and radiological results, while EPR is more suitable for aggressive and recurrent lesions and serves as an effective measure after IF failure.
本研究旨在探讨股骨近端良性病变最常应用的两种外科手术的适应证。
我们回顾性分析了2010年1月至2015年1月期间142例股骨近端良性病变患者。110例患者采用内固定(IF),32例患者采用人工关节置换(EPR)。比较两组患者的临床资料,包括手术时间、失血量、住院时间和住院费用。采用肌肉骨骼肿瘤学会93评分(MSTS-93)和Harris髋关节评分(HHS)评估肢体活动情况。对局部复发和并发症进行统计学比较。
平均随访66个月(范围32 - 84个月)。EPR组手术时间和住院时间显著缩短(分别为p < 0.05和p < 0.05),而失血量和住院费用显著增加(分别为p < 0.05和p < 0.05)。EPR组在术后3周时MSTS-93和HHS的功能结果较高(分别为p < 0.001和p < 0.001),但在术后6个月时较低(分别为p = 0.031和p = 0.042)。在术后3个月时,两组在这两个评分上无差异(分别为p = 0.261和p = 0.134)。两组的局部复发率和并发症发生率相似(分别为p = 0.895和p = 0.942)。
股骨近端良性病变的治疗策略应取决于病变部位、大小、初始诊断以及皮质骨变薄程度。IF和EPR均能实现满意的局部控制以及功能和影像学结果,而EPR更适用于侵袭性和复发性病变,并且是IF失败后的有效措施。