title: Periprosthetic bone remodelling around a prosthesis for distal femoral tumours. Measurement by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA).
abstract: We used dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) to evaluate the extent of periprosthetic bone remodelling around a prosthesis for distal femoral reconstruction, the Kotz modular femoral tibial replacement (KMFTR; Howmedica, Rutherford, New Jersey). A total of 23 patients was entered into the study which had four parts: 1) 17 patients were scanned three times on both the implant and contralateral legs to determine whether the precision of DEXA measurements was adequate to estimate bone loss surrounding the anchorage piece of the KMFTR; 2) in 23 patients the bone mineral density (BMD) in different regions of interest surrounding the diaphyseal anchorage was compared with that of the contralateral femur at the same location to test whether there was consistent evidence of loss of BMD adjacent to the prosthetic stem; 3) in 12 patients sequential studies were performed about one year apart to compare bone loss; and 4) bone loss was compared in ten patients with implants fixed by three screws and in 13 without screws. The mean coefficients of variation (SD/mean) for the 17 sets of repeated scans ranged from 2.9% to 7.8% at different regions of interest in the KMFTR leg and from 1.4% to 2.5% in the contralateral leg. BMD was decreased in the KMFTR leg relative to the contralateral limb and the percentage of BMD loss in general increased as the region of interest moved distally in the femur. Studies done after one year showed no consistent pattern of progressive bone loss between the two measurements. The ten patients with implants fixed by screws were found to have a mean loss of BMD of 42% in the most distal part of the femur, while the 13 without screw fixation had a mean loss of 11%. DEXA was shown to have adequate precision to evaluate loss of BMD around the KMFTR. This was evident relative to the contralateral leg in all patients and generally increased in the most distal part of the femur. In general, it stabilised between two measurements taken one year apart and was greater surrounding implants fixed by cross-locking screws.
authors.affiliation: Department of Medical Imaging, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Lan
authors.forename: J S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Wunder
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Griffin
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Davis
authors.forename: R S
authors.initials: RS
authors.lastname: Bell
authors.forename: L M
authors.initials: LM
authors.lastname: White
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Ichise
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Cole
mesh_terms: D015502:Absorptiometry, Photon; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D015519:Bone Density; D016723:Bone Remodeling; D001863:Bone Screws; D005260:Female; D005266:Femoral Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D019736:Prostheses and Implants; D015203:Reproducibility of Results