Table 5.

Summary of outcomes in upper extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction

Study	Endoprosthesis type	Sample size total (upper extremity)	Location	Aseptic loosening	Infection	Any-cause revision	Periprosthetic fracture	Secondary amputation	Mean followup (months)
Current study	CPS	8	2 PH, 6 DH, 1 diaphysis	2 ulna	2	4	0	0	68
Tyler et al. [29]	CPS	221 (6)	2 PH, 4 DH	NR	NR	0	0 (all 6 lower extremity)	0	50
Kulkarni et al. [18]	Stemmed EPR	10	DH	3	0	4	0	0	96
Abudu et al. [1]	Stemmed EPR	18 (2)	2 diaphysis	2	0	2	0	0	65 (median)
Ahlmann & Menendez [2]	Stemmed EPR	6 (1)	1 diaphysis	1	0	1	0	0	21.6
Raiss et al. [24]	Stemmed EPR	39	PH	1	2	5	0	1	38
Cannon et al. 8]	Stemmed EPR	83	PH	0	2	2	0	0	30
Kumar et al. [19]	Stemmed EPR	100	PH	6	1	7	0	8	108
Asavamongkolkul et al. [3]	Custom Stemmed EPR	59	30 PH, 4DH, 9 diaphysis	2	2	2	0	3	90

CPS = Compress^® Compliant Pre-stress Device; EPR = endoprosthetic replacement; PH = proximal humerus; DH = distal humerus; NR = not reported.