Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 91-B, Issue 10, 1378-1382.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B10.22643  
Copyright © 2009 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shekkeris, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Briggs, T. W. R.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shekkeris, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Briggs, T. W. R.

Endoprosthetic reconstruction of the distal tibia and ankle joint after resection of primary bone tumours

A. S. Shekkeris, MRCS, Core Trainee in Orthopaedics1; S. A. Hanna, MRCS, Specialist Orthopaedic Registrar1; M. D. Sewell, MRCS, Specialist Orthopaedic Registrar1; B. G. I. Spiegelberg, MRCS, Research Fellow in Orthopaedics1; W. J. S. Aston, FRCS(Orth), Specialist Orthopaedic Registrar1; G. W. Blunn, PhD, Professor in Biomedical Engineering2; S. R. Cannon, MA, MCh(Orth), FRCS, Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon1; and T. W. R. Briggs, MD(Res), MCh(Orth), FRCS, Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon1

1 London Bone and Soft Tissue Sarcoma Service
2 Centre for Biomedical Engineering, Institue of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Sciences Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, Middlesex HA7 4LP, UK.

Correspondence should be sent to Mr S. A. Hanna; e-mail: sammyhanna{at}hotmail.com

Endoprosthetic replacement of the distal tibia and ankle joint for a primary bone tumour is a rarely attempted and technically challenging procedure. We report the outcome of six patients treated between 1981 and 2007. There were four males and two females, with a mean age of 43.5 years (15 to 75), and a mean follow-up of 9.6 years (1 to 27). No patient developed a local recurrence or metastasis. Two of the six went on to have a below-knee amputation for persistent infection after a mean 16 months (1 to 31). The four patients who retained their endoprosthesis had a mean musculoskeletal tumour society score of 70% and a mean Toronto extremity salvage score of 71%. All were pain free and able to perform most activities of daily living in comfort.

A custom-made endoprosthetic replacement of the distal tibia and ankle joint is a viable treatment option for carefully selected patients with a primary bone tumour. Patients should, however, be informed of the risk of infection and the potential need for amputation if this cannot be controlled.






(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General