Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
dc.contributor.author
Albergo, J. I.
dc.contributor.author
Gaston, L. C.
dc.contributor.author
Farfalli, Germán Luis
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.contributor.author
Laitinen, M.
dc.contributor.author
Parry, M.
dc.contributor.author
Ayerza, M. A.
dc.contributor.author
Risk, Marcelo
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.contributor.author
Jeys, L. M.
dc.contributor.author
Aponte Tinao, L. A.
dc.date.available
2020-08-04T19:43:19Z
dc.date.issued
2019-03
dc.identifier.citation
Albergo, J. I.; Gaston, L. C.; Farfalli, Germán Luis; Laitinen, M.; Parry, M.; et al.; Failure rates and functional results for intercalary femur reconstructions after tumour resection; Springer; Musculoskeletal Surgery; 104; 3-2019; 59–65
dc.identifier.issn
2035-5114
dc.identifier.uri
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/110841
dc.description.abstract
Purpose To compare the results for patients treated with intercalary endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) or intercalary allograft reconstruction for diaphyseal tumours of the femur in terms of: (1) reconstruction failure rates; (2) cause of failure; (3) risk of amputation of the limb; and (4) functional result. Methods Patients with bone sarcomas of the femoral diaphysis, treated with en bloc resection and reconstructed with an intercalary EPR or allograft, were reviewed. A total of 107 patients were included in the study (36 EPR and 71 intercalary allograft reconstruction). No differences were found between the two groups in terms of follow-up, age, gender and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. Results The probability of failure for intercalary EPR was 36% at 5 years and 22% for allograft at 5 years (p = 0.26). Mechanical failures were the most prevalent in both types of reconstruction. Aseptic loosening and implant fracture are the main cause in the EPR group. For intercalary allograft reconstructions, fracture followed by nonunion was the most common complication. Ten-year risk of amputation after failure for both reconstructions was 3%. There were no differences between the groups in terms of the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score (27.4, range 16–30 vs. 27.6, range 17–30). Conclusions We have demonstrated similar failure rates for both reconstructions. In both techniques, mechanical failure was the most common complication with a low rate of limb amputation and good functional results.
dc.format
application/pdf
dc.language.iso
eng
dc.publisher
Springer
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.rights
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.subject
ALLOGRAFT
dc.subject
BONE SARCOMA
dc.subject
ENDOPORSTHESIS
dc.subject
INTERCALARY
dc.subject.classification
Trasplantes
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
Medicina Clínica
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.subject.classification
CIENCIAS MÉDICAS Y DE LA SALUD
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.title
Failure rates and functional results for intercalary femur reconstructions after tumour resection
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type
info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.date.updated
2020-04-24T17:44:44Z
dc.identifier.eissn
2035-5106
dc.journal.volume
104
dc.journal.pagination
59–65
dc.journal.pais
Italia
![Se ha confirmado la validez de este valor de autoridad por un usuario](/themes/CONICETDigital/images/authority_control/invisible.gif)
dc.description.fil
Fil: Albergo, J. I.. Instituto Universidad Escuela de Medicina del Hospital Italiano; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Gaston, L. C.. Royal Orthopaedic Hospital; Reino Unido
dc.description.fil
Fil: Farfalli, Germán Luis. Instituto Universidad Escuela de Medicina del Hospital Italiano; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Laitinen, M.. Helsinki University Central Hospital; Finlandia. Royal Orthopaedic Hospital; Reino Unido
dc.description.fil
Fil: Parry, M.. Royal Orthopaedic Hospital; Reino Unido
dc.description.fil
Fil: Ayerza, M. A.. Instituto Universidad Escuela de Medicina del Hospital Italiano; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Risk, Marcelo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas. Oficina de Coordinacion Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional E Ingenieria Biomedica. - Hospital Italiano. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional E Ingenieria Biomedica. - Instituto Universitario Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Instituto de Medicina Traslacional E Ingenieria Biomedica.; Argentina
dc.description.fil
Fil: Jeys, L. M.. Royal Orthopaedic Hospital; Reino Unido
dc.description.fil
Fil: Aponte Tinao, L. A.. Instituto Universidad Escuela de Medicina del Hospital Italiano; Argentina
dc.journal.title
Musculoskeletal Surgery
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12306-019-00595-1
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://europepmc.org/article/med/30848435
dc.relation.alternativeid
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12306-019-00595-1
Archivos asociados