Abstract
BACKGROUND: Skeletal metastases related pathological fracture reconstruction methods in proximal femur range from osteosynthesis to tumor prostheses with acetabular reconstruction, depending on lesion size and location. This retrospective study, of 299 patients surgically treated for proximal femur metastases, investigates implant survival, complications, and functional outcomes of various surgical strategies for treating pathological fractures of the proximal femur. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study of 299 patients surgically treated for proximal femur metastases, investigates implant survival (Kaplan-Meier), complications, and functional outcomes of different surgical strategies. The chi-test and Mann-Witney U test were used for analysis between groups. The subdistribution Hazard Ratio (SHR) of the role of factors affecting implant survival was calculated using competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Reconstruction methods comprised osteosynthesis (n = 59), hemiarthroplasty (n = 72), total hip replacement (THA) (n = 43), and endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) either with or without acetabular component (n = 125). The precise location and size of the metastases was evaluated. The mean implant survival was 17 months (SD 21.2). Complications occurred in 33 patients, 20 required revision surgery. In prosthesis patients, infections and dislocations were the main complications, while mechanical failure predominated in the osteosynthesis group. Mean implant failure time was 11 months, shortest in THA and osteosynthesis. Functional outcomes in 38 patients showed a mean Oxford Hip Score (OHS) of 33, with no significant differences across methods. INTERPRETATION: Patient survival is a critical factor in selecting the appropriate reconstruction method for trochanteric metastatic lesions. Osteosynthesis is suitable for patients with a limited life expectancy. In cases of metastases involving the head-neck anatomical region, arthroplasty with acetabular reconstruction offers no advantage over hemiarthroplasty. With our data there was no statistical difference in functional outcome between different surgical methods.