Table 3.
Review of the available literature on proximal tibial endoprosthetic reconstruction
| Study | Number of implants | Mean followup (years) | Implant survivorship/revision ratea,b | MSTS scoreb,c | Amputationb | Infectionb | Local recurrenceb | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–9 years | 10–14 years | 15–19 years | ≥ 20 years | |||||||
| Horowitz et al. [23] (1991) | 16 | 5.3 | 31.3d | 3E, 7G, 4Fe | 18.8% | 37.5% | 0.0% | |||
| Malawer and Chou [33] (1995) | 13 | 3.5 | 46.2d | 70.0% | 23.1% | 30.8% | 0.0% | |||
| Grimer et al. [19] (1999) | 151 | 6.7 | 66.0d | 77%f | 17.0% | 28.0% | 16.0% | |||
| Kawai et al. [28] (1999) | 7 | 3.1 | 58g | 90% | 14.3% | 12.5%h | 0.0% | |||
| Ilyas et al. [24] (2000) | 15 | 3.5 | 100g | 61% | 13.3% | 13.3% | 0.0% | |||
| Bickels et al. [3] (2001) | 55 | 6.3 | 5.4d | 48G/E, 6F, 1P | 3.6% | 3.6% | 6.2% | |||
| Natarajan et al. [37] (2003) | 133 | 5.0 | 84.5g | 63E, 36G, F8, P21 | 2.3% | 12.0% | 3.0% | |||
| Flint et al. [14] (2006) | 44i | 5.0 | 73.0g | 75% | 15.9% | 15.9% | 4.5% | |||
| Myers et al. [36] (2007) | 99 | 15.0 | 30.0d | 25%j | 19.5% | 5.1% | ||||
| Jeys et al. [26] (2008) | 136k | 9.0 | 62.5g | 40.6g | NA | 18.4% | 21.0% | 4.0% | ||
| Wu et al. [51] (2008) | 44 | 7.1 | 44.4/81.4g,l | 22.2/65.3g,l | 84.6% | 15.9% | 15.9% | 2.3% | ||
| Schwartz et al. [current study] (2010) | 52 | 8.0 | 93.8g | 86.4g | 65.8g | 37.0g | 82.0% | 9.6% | 5.8% | 5.8% |
aShown as percentage (number as reported in original article converted for ease of comparison); bnumbers (as reported) converted to percentage of all cases for ease of comparison; call but first two articles (Horowitz et al. [23] and Malawer et al. [33]) used the revised 1993 MSTS scoring system [13]; dreported percentage of implants revised; eE = excellent, G = Good, F = Fair, P = Poor, according to the 1987 MSTS scoring system [11] f50 of 100 analyzed; gKaplan-Meier survivorship of implant; hreported as four wound complications of 32 total knee implants (comprising both proximal tibia and distal femur); iall treated with cementless Kotz Modular Femur and Tibia Resection System (Stryker, Rutherford, NJ); jnumber reported as calculated by survival analysis; kincludes all tibial endoprostheses; lfirst number is survivorship of nine custom implants; second number is survivorship of 35 modular implants; MSTS = Musculoskeletal Tumor Society; NA = not available or not studied.