The functional outcome after tumor resection and endoprosthesis around the knee: a systematic review


Endoprosthetic Replacement; MSTS Score; TESS Score; RHK Implants, FHK Implants

Published online: May 03 2022

Oluwaseyi Idowu, Kehinde Oluwadiya, Samuel Eyesan, Mohamad Nasser, Michelle Maden, Adesegun Abudu

From the Faculty of Health and Social Care, Edge Hill University Ormskirk UK


The evidence for the functional outcome of endo- prosthetic replacement (EPR) after tumour resection has been from few cohort studies. A scoping search revealed no systematic review on patient reported outcome measures after EPR around the knee. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome of distal femoral and proximal tibial EPR after tumour resection.

A systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search identified 2560 articles from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. 36 studies satisfying the selection criteria were included for data synthesis. Pooled analysis was performed for homogenous studies. Narrative synthesis was performed for all the studies due to heterogeneity in methodological and statistical analysis.

Amongst the overall patient population of 2930, mean ages ranged from 18-66 years and the mean follow up periods in the studies ranged from 12 - 180 months. The weighted mean functional outcome was similar for patients who had DFEPR and PTEPR. The functional outcome scores of Rotating Hinge Knee implants (RHK) were significantly greater than that for Fixed Hinge Knee implants (FHK). The weighted mean functional outcome scores were higher after cemented fixation and after primary EPR procedures.

The current evidence suggests that functional out- come after EPR in the knee is good, and RHK implants are better than FHK implants. Functional outcome after primary EPR was significantly better than following revision EPR, and this underscores the importance of minimising complications at the primary surgery.