A long-term experience with Mutars tumor megaprostheses: analysis of 187 cases.

PURPOSE: Modular megaprostheses have widely replaced allografts, as a reconstructive option; however, failures of these devices remain high. Aim of this study was to analyze outcomes, survival of the implants, incidence and types of complications with Mutars modular endoprostheses at long term. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2019, 187 Mutars prostheses were implanted in two dedicated centers: 72 upper limbs and 115 lower limbs reconstructions. Diagnoses included 107 primary malignant bone or soft tissue tumors, 65 metastases, 8 benign bone tumors and 7 non-oncologic cases. Silver-coated prostheses were used in 118/187 (63%) cases. RESULTS: At last follow-up, 76.5% of patients had retained their implant. The overall failure rate was 23.5% at a mean of 1.7 years. There were 22 mechanical failures and 22 non-mechanical failures. The overall implant survival to all types of failure was 68% and 52% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Infection was the most common mode of failure with an incidence of 6.9%. Implant survival to infection was better for silver-coated implants than for standard implants even if with no significant difference (p = 0.56). Functional results were satisfactory in 97% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The overall implant survival at long term was satisfactory with Mutars prostheses. The incidence of complications with Mutars prosthesis is in line with the incidence reported in the literature with other types of tumor prosthesis. The most frequent cause of failure was infection with a lower incidence in silver-coated prostheses; silver coating seems to prevent infection in distal femur and proximal tibia. The silver coating seems to be particularly useful in two-stage revisions with a lower incidence of secondary amputation. In higher risk patients, silver-coated prostheses are the preferable choice for the reduction of the reinfection rate. The functional results of Mutars prostheses were excellent or good in most of cases. The current paper is design to enhance the literature on megaprosthesis in tumor surgery, proven that this system is one of the most used all over the word and one of the best performing.

How do we estimate survival? External validation of a tool for survival estimation in patients with metastatic bone disease-decision analysis and comparison of three international patient populations.

BACKGROUND: We recently developed a clinical decision support tool, capable of estimating the likelihood of survival at 3 and 12 months following surgery for patients with operable skeletal metastases. After making it publicly available on www.PATHFx.org , we attempted to externally validate it using independent, international data. METHODS: We collected data from patients treated at 13 Italian orthopaedic oncology referral centers between 2010 and 2013, then applied to PATHFx, which generated a probability of survival at three and 12-months for each patient. We assessed accuracy using the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), clinical utility using Decision Curve Analysis (DCA), and compared the Italian patient data to the training set (United States) and first external validation set (Scandinavia). RESULTS: The Italian dataset contained 287 records with at least 12 months follow-up information. The AUCs for the three-month and 12-month estimates was 0.80 and 0.77, respectively. There were missing data, including the surgeon's estimate of survival that was missing in the majority of records. Physiologically, Italian patients were similar to patients in the training and first validation sets. However notable differences were observed in the proportion of those surviving three and 12-months, suggesting differences in referral patterns and perhaps indications for surgery. CONCLUSIONS: PATHFx was successfully validated in an Italian dataset containing missing data. This study demonstrates its broad applicability to European patients, even in centers with differing treatment philosophies from those previously studied.

Management of long bone metastases: recommendations from the Italian Orthopaedic Society bone metastasis study group.

The purpose of this article is to outline the current approach to patients affected by metastasis to the long bones and to present a clinical and surgical algorithm available for clinicians and for future research. A modern approach to patients affected by long bone metastasis in fact requires a multidisciplinary contest where oncologists, radiotherapists, surgeons and physical therapists cooperate with a shared vision, in order to provide the best possible integrated treatments available. The authors of this article constitute the Bone Metastasis Study Group of the Italian Orthopaedic Society (SIOT): a national group of orthopedic tumor surgeons who are dedicated to studying the approach, techniques and outcomes of surgery for metastatic tumours of the musculoskeletal system.

[Surgical chances in kidney cancer bone metastases]. / Possibilità chirurgiche nelle metastasi ossee da carcinomi renali.

Kidney cancer, together with breast and lung, is one of the most frequent primaries causing bone mestastases which require some kind of surgical treatment. Renal mets, however, have distinguished features making their surgical treatment a real challenge: their open treatment is at high risk for massive bleeding and the severe destruction of bone-stock makes reconstruction often very difficult. Nevertheless, the surgical treatment of these metastases can dramatically improve the patient's quality of life. For the important problems which must be faced and solved, surgery of Renal Cell metastases should not be left to general orthopedic surgeons but these patients should be referred to Centers with a major experience in MusculoSkeletal Oncology.