Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2016, Article ID 2606521, 5 pages
Research Article

Modular Endoprostheses for Nonneoplastic Conditions: Midterm Complications and Survival

1Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, “Mater Domini” University Hospital, “Magna Graecia” University of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy
2Department of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
3Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
4Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy

Received 29 August 2016; Revised 26 October 2016; Accepted 3 November 2016

Academic Editor: Konstantinos Anagnostakos

Copyright © 2016 Marco De Gori et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


The use of modular endoprostheses is a viable option to manage both tumor resection and severe bone loss due to nonneoplastic conditions such as fracture sequelae, failed osteoarticular grafts, arthroplasty revisions, and periprosthetic fractures. We sought to investigate both midterm complications and failures occurred in 87 patients who underwent a megaprosthetic reconstruction in a nonneoplastic setting. After a mean follow-up of 58 (1–167) months, overall failure-free survival was 91.5% at 1 year, 80% at 2 years, 71.6% at 5 years, and 69.1% at 5 and 10 years. There was no significant difference in the survival rate according to the diagnosis at the index procedure (), nor to the reconstruction site (). The use of megaprostheses in a postneoplastic setting did not affect survival rate in comparison with endoprosthetic reconstruction of pure nonneoplastic conditions (). Perimegaprosthetic infection was the leading complication, occurring in 10 (11.5%) patients and implying a megaprosthetic revision in all but one case. Physicians should consider these results when discussing with patients desired outcomes of endoprosthetic reconstructions of a nonneoplastic disease.