Abstract
A Biomechanical Comparison between Cement Packing Combined with Extra Fixation and Three-Dimensional Printed Strut-Type Prosthetic Reconstruction for Giant Cell Tumor of Bone in Distal Femur
Highlights
In 1987, Campanacci et al radiographically classified giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB), a benign but aggressive primary bone tumor, into three grades according to their level of bone destruction [1, 2]
3D-printed strut-type prosthetic reconstruction combined with subchondral bone grafting can be an alternative method for the treatment of GCTBs in distal femur
The aim of our study is to analyze the biomechanical performance of the 3D-printed strut-type prosthesis in comparison with cement packing combined with extra fixation
Summary
In 1987, Campanacci et al radiographically classified giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB), a benign but aggressive primary bone tumor, into three grades according to their level of bone destruction [1, 2]. The most popular reconstruction method is cement packing combined with subchondral bone grafting and extra fixation. Bone cement can perfectly match the osseous voids and provide sufficient mechanical strength, and it has a tumoricidal ability by thermal polymerization, which can adversely damage articular cartilage as well[4, 5]. The most common reconstruction method for bone defects caused by giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) is cement packing combined with subchondral bone grafting and extra fixation. This method has several limitations involving bone cement and bone graft, which may lead to poor prognosis and joint function. The goal of this study is to comparatively analyze the biomechanical performance of reconstruction methods aimed at the identification of better operative strategy
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
