Skip to main content
OrthoVellumOrthopaedic Exam Prep
Pricing
About OrthoVellum
OrthoVellum
A living orthopaedic atlas

Exam-focused orthopaedic references, a question bank, viva practice, and spaced-repetition revision — with every clinical claim traceable to its source. Content is educational only and is not a substitute for local supervision, clinical judgement, or institutional policy.


Library

  • Clinical Topics
  • Blog
  • Exam Frequency Index
  • Site Updates
  • Content Methodology

Company

  • About Us
  • Authors & Disclosure
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Policy
  • Advertising Policy

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA

Support

  • Support OrthoVellum
  • Help Center
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
Evidence. Clarity. Practice.

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not medical advice. Verify clinically important information against current local guidance.

Endoprosthetic Replacement of the Distal Femur (Megaprosthesis)

Operative SurgeryOncology
OncologyAdvancedCore Procedure

Endoprosthetic Replacement of the Distal Femur (Megaprosthesis)

Surgical technique guide for distal femoral megaprosthesis replacement after tumour resection or catastrophic bone loss — the medial parapatellar exposure laid out step by step, modular rotating-hinge implants, cemented and compress fixation, oncologic margins, extensor mechanism reconstruction, complications and rehabilitation. advanced orthopaedic operative-surgery guide.

Procedure console
28 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
High-yield overview

Modular rotating-hinge megaprosthesis after wide resection or massive bone loss · advanced

MegaprosthesisThe reconstruction
Medial parapatellarThe exposure
Popliteal vesselsThe structure you must protect
3-4 hrTypical duration
Critical Must-Knows
  • The medial parapatellar approach is extensile and provides excellent exposure for both the tumour resection and the subsequent reconstruction; the incision can be extended proximally along the vastus medialis or distally along the tibial crest as needed.
  • Oncologic margins require 2-3 cm of normal bone beyond the tumour on preoperative MRI; the resection level is marked with an oscillating saw under image intensifier guidance and confirmed with frozen section of the marrow margin.
  • The modular rotating-hinge megaprosthesis restores the extensor mechanism by reattaching the patellar tendon to the anterior flange of the tibial component or using a synthetic augment (Trevira tube or equivalent) when tendon length is insufficient.
  • Cemented stems remain the most common fixation in North America and Europe for tumour megaprostheses; uncemented press-fit or compress (force-directed) fixation with a porous collar offers biologic ingrowth and is preferred in younger patients with good bone quality.
  • Infection is the leading cause of early failure (greater than 10 percent at 5 years in most series); perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, antibiotic-loaded cement when used, and meticulous soft-tissue handling are mandatory.

When & Why


Indication. A distal femoral megaprosthesis is used when a segment of distal femur must be resected en bloc — for a primary bone tumour with a clear margin, or for catastrophic bone loss that no conventional implant can reconstruct — and the limb can still be salvaged. The goal is wide local excision of the diseased segment and immediate, stable reconstruction with a modular rotating-hinge prosthesis. Oncologic indications

  • Primary malignant bone tumours of the distal femur (osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, chondrosarcoma) in patients with no metastatic disease and a resectable lesion with adequate margins.
  • Metastatic disease with a solitary or oligometastatic lesion causing catastrophic bone loss or impending fracture when curettage and augmentation are not feasible.
  • Failed limb-salvage reconstruction with a massive allograft or a previous megaprosthesis requiring revision. Non-oncologic indications
  • Catastrophic periprosthetic distal femoral fracture or bone loss after total knee arthroplasty where conventional revision implants cannot achieve stable fixation.
  • Non-reconstructable distal femoral bone loss from infection, osteolysis, or multiple failed revisions.
  • Severe distal femoral deformity or non-union with bone loss exceeding 5 cm. Contraindications. Absolute: active deep infection at the site (must be eradicated first); an inadequate soft-tissue envelope for coverage (requires plastic surgery input); a patient unable to comply with postoperative weight-bearing or surveillance. Relative: the skeletally immature patient (consider an expandable prosthesis or rotationplasty); poor expected survival (less than 6 months), where palliative stabilisation may suffice; severe peripheral vascular disease precluding safe tourniquet use or vessel mobilisation. The one decision that matters — stem fixation. Whatever the indication, the reconstruction itself converges on the same modular rotating-hinge implant. The real choice is how the stems are fixed:
Cemented stem

The benchmark in most tumour centres. Allows immediate full weight-bearing; antibiotic-loaded cement reduces infection risk. Aseptic loosening remains the dominant long-term failure mode. Preferred in older patients, revision settings, and osteopenic or irradiated bone.

Compress / porous collar

A short intramedullary device applies continuous compression at the bone-prosthesis interface and promotes extracortical bone bridging. Lower aseptic loosening rates in young patients with good diaphyseal bone; higher technical demand and precise bone preparation required.

Uncemented press-fit

Hydroxyapatite-coated stems rely on biologic ingrowth, so they require good diaphyseal bone quality and are less suitable after radiation or in osteopenic bone. Useful in selected young patients.

Consent specifically for: infection (the commonest early failure, greater than 10 percent at 5 years) and the possible need for staged revision or even amputation; extensor lag and some loss of knee flexion; a lifelong risk of mechanical hinge failure and reoperation; limb-length discrepancy; and, in oncologic cases, local recurrence and the need for long-term surveillance. Setup. Supine on a radiolucent table with a bump under the ipsilateral buttock; the leg is draped free to allow full flexion and extension. A tourniquet is applied high on the thigh but inflated only after the approach and vessel identification. Image intensifier is positioned for AP and lateral views of the distal femur and knee.

The Operation


The goal is to expose the distal femur through the extensile medial parapatellar approach, identify and protect the popliteal vessels and sciatic nerve before any tumour mobilisation, achieve a wide margin, reconstruct with a modular rotating-hinge megaprosthesis, and restore the extensor mechanism under appropriate tension. The exposure is laid out in full below (and in depth on the medial parapatellar approach to the knee page).

Distal femur megaprosthesis
Distal femoral endoprosthetic replacement (megaprosthesis) with a hinged knee after tumour resection.Credit: OrthoVellum surgical illustration

Operative sequence

Step 1Position, image intensifier & landmarks
  • Supine on a radiolucent table, bump under the ipsilateral buttock, leg draped free for full flexion-extension.
  • Tourniquet high on the thigh — inflated only after the approach and vessel identification.
  • Image intensifier set up for AP and lateral views of the distal femur and knee.
Step 2Longitudinal incision — incorporate the biopsy tract
  • A longitudinal midline incision from 8-10 cm proximal to the patella to the tibial tubercle, curving slightly medially over the tibial crest if needed.
  • In oncologic cases the biopsy tract must be incorporated and excised en bloc with the specimen.
Step 3Medial parapatellar arthrotomy (the exposure)
  • Perform the medial parapatellar arthrotomy, leaving a cuff of medial retinaculum on the patella for later repair.
  • Evert the patella laterally. Elevate the vastus medialis subperiosteally from the medial intermuscular septum if proximal exposure is required.
  • The incision is extensile: proximally along the medial border of vastus medialis (or into the vastus lateralis interval), distally along the medial border of the tibial crest for tibial component placement; the medial head of gastrocnemius may be released from the posterior femur to improve posterior access.
Step 4Vessel and nerve control — before any bone work
  • Identify and loop the popliteal vessels and sciatic nerve (with its tibial and common peroneal branches) with vessel loops before any tumour mobilisation.
  • Confirm the genicular arteries and control them with bipolar diathermy or ligatures.
  • Tag the patellar tendon with heavy non-absorbable suture at its insertion on the tibial tubercle.
  • Incise the joint capsule circumferentially around the distal femur, protecting the popliteal vessels posteriorly with blunt retractors and vessel loops.
Step 5Tumour resection (oncologic cases)
  • Define the resection level on preoperative MRI — at least 2 cm of normal bone beyond the T2 signal abnormality.
  • Mark the osteotomy on the anterior cortex with an oscillating saw under image intensifier; perform the cut with saline cooling.
  • Send the proximal marrow margin (1 cm) for frozen section. If positive, resect an additional 2 cm and repeat.
  • Remove the specimen en bloc with the biopsy tract and any involved soft tissue, maintaining orientation for pathologic analysis.
Step 6Prepare the femoral canal
  • Ream the femoral canal sequentially to the planned stem diameter (usually 12-16 mm).
  • For the cemented technique, over-ream by 2-3 mm to allow a cement mantle; for uncemented or compress fixation, ream line-to-line or under-ream by 0.5 mm according to the implant system.
  • Irrigate thoroughly to remove debris and marrow fat.
Step 7Tibial preparation
  • Resect the proximal tibia perpendicular to its long axis at the planned joint line (usually 10-12 mm below the lateral tibial plateau).
  • Prepare the tibial canal for the stem (cemented or uncemented).
  • Position the tibial component in 0-5 degrees of posterior slope and neutral rotation referenced to the tibial tubercle.
Step 8Trial reduction and hinge assembly
  • Assemble the modular segments to restore length and alignment, and perform a trial reduction with the rotating-hinge mechanism.
  • Confirm the knee flexes to 90-110 degrees with no hyperextension; check patellar tracking and adjust the anterior flange rotation if necessary.
  • Verify limb length clinically and radiographically.
Step 9Final implantation
  • Cement the femoral and tibial stems with antibiotic-loaded cement (if cemented technique).
  • Ensure the porous collar sits in direct contact with the cut bone surface — no cement interposed.
  • Assemble and lock the final hinge mechanism to the manufacturer instructions.
  • Reattach the patellar tendon to the anterior flange of the tibial component, or to a synthetic augment (Trevira tube), under appropriate tension so the knee flexes to 90 degrees without excessive pull on the suture line.
Step 10Soft-tissue reconstruction and closure
  • Repair the medial retinaculum and vastus medialis with heavy absorbable suture; if a Trevira tube was used, secure it to the remaining quadriceps fascia.
  • Close the subcutaneous tissue and skin in layers over a drain.
  • Apply a compressive dressing and a hinged knee brace locked in extension.
Popliteal vessels and sciatic nerve — the critical safety step

Before any osteotomy or tumour mobilisation, identify the popliteal artery and vein and the sciatic nerve. The popliteal artery lies directly on the posterior surface of the distal femoral metaphysis, separated only by a thin layer of fat and the joint capsule — it can be lacerated or stretched during posterior capsular release. The sciatic nerve divides into its tibial and common peroneal branches at the upper border of the popliteal fossa; injury causes foot drop or complete paralysis. Loop both structures early, keep them under direct vision throughout the resection, and protect them posteriorly with blunt retractors. If the artery is injured: direct pressure, call for vascular help, and repair primarily where possible.

The porous collar — never cement it

Place the porous collar in direct contact with the cut bone surface, without any intervening cement. Direct bone contact promotes extracortical bone bridging and stress transfer, which reduces aseptic loosening — this is the whole point of compress and porous-collar fixation. Cement over the collar blocks ingrowth and defeats the design.

Extensor mechanism tension and rotation determine the result

Extensor mechanism integrity determines functional outcome more than any other factor. Tension the patellar tendon repair so the knee flexes to 90 degrees intraoperatively without excessive pull on the suture line — an extensor lag greater than 10-15 degrees is functionally disabling. The medial and lateral collateral ligaments are sacrificed with the resection, so stability depends on the rotating hinge; confirm component rotation against the tibial tubercle and the epicondylar axis before cementing, or the knee will be unstable and the patella will maltrack.

Aftercare & Complications


Rehabilitation | Phase | Timing | Immobilisation | Therapy | |-------|--------|----------------|---------| | 1 | 0-2 weeks | Hinged knee brace locked in extension | Touch weight-bearing; quadriceps setting and ankle pumps from day 1 | | 2 | 2-6 weeks | Brace locked in extension (4-6 weeks total to protect the extensor repair) | Passive and active-assisted flexion begins at 2 weeks; progressive weight-bearing | | 3 | 6-12 weeks | Brace unlocked | Active flexion — aim for 90 degrees by 8 weeks and 110 degrees by 12 weeks; progressive resistance | | 4 | 3-6 months | No brace | Full weight-bearing; advanced strengthening and proprioception; low-impact activities from 4-6 months | High-impact sports are discouraged permanently because of the risk of periprosthetic fracture and hinge failure. Most long-term survivors regain knee range of motion averaging 90-110 degrees; patients with an extensor lag less than 10 degrees achieve near-normal gait, and Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) scores average 70-85 percent of normal. Oncologic surveillance: clinical and radiographic review at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, then annually; MRI of the resection bed and CT chest every 3 months for the first 2 years, then 6-monthly to 5 years; CRP and ESR at every visit for the first 2 years as an infection screen. Complications

Deep infection (early)
Recognition
Wound breakdown, sinus, persistent pain; rising CRP/ESR; the leading cause of early revision (8-12 percent)
Prevention
Dual antibiotic prophylaxis; antibiotic-loaded cement; silver-coated implant in high risk; meticulous soft-tissue handling
Management
Aspiration and culture; debridement with antibiotics and often staged implant exchange; amputation in 20-30 percent of infected cases
Wound dehiscence / skin necrosis
Recognition
Edge necrosis or dehiscence, especially after neoadjuvant radiation; large dead space
Prevention
Careful flap handling; prophylactic gastrocnemius flap when coverage is marginal; drains and compressive dressings
Management
Early plastic surgery input; flap coverage before superficial breakdown becomes deep infection
Extensor lag greater than 15 degrees
Recognition
Quadriceps weakness and poor active extension; functional limp
Prevention
Tension the patellar tendon repair so the knee flexes to 90 degrees; protect in a brace for 4-6 weeks
Management
Bracing and therapy; revision of the tendon reconstruction or Trevira augmentation if disabling
Aseptic loosening (intermediate)
Recognition
Progressive pain and radiolucent lines at the stem or cement mantle; 10-15 percent at 10 years for cemented stems
Prevention
Correct stem diameter and cement mantle; consider compress fixation in young active patients
Management
Rule out infection first; revise to a longer stem or a compress construct
Periprosthetic fracture at the stem tip
Recognition
Pain after minor trauma; fracture at the stem-bone junction on radiograph
Prevention
Avoid over- or under-reaming; prophylactic cerclage cables in osteopenic bone
Management
Revision with a longer stem bypassing the fracture, plus cerclage wiring
Hinge mechanism wear or dislocation
Recognition
Instability, clicking or locking; a sudden change in stability
Prevention
Correct component rotation (tibial tubercle and epicondylar axis); avoid hyperextension
Management
Hinge or liner exchange; revision if the component is malrotated
Local recurrence (oncologic)
Recognition
Pain or a mass at the resection bed; change on MRI; 5-15 percent
Prevention
Negative margins (greater than 2 cm marrow confirmed on frozen section); en bloc excision of the biopsy tract
Management
Re-stage; wide re-resection versus amputation, and re-plan the reconstruction
Stem fracture / fatigue failure (late)
Recognition
Sudden pain or instability after years of use; mechanical failure on imaging
Prevention
Counsel the patient to avoid high-impact activities permanently
Management
Revision of the failed segment
Complications — recognition, prevention, management
ComplicationRecognitionPreventionManagement
Deep infection (early)Wound breakdown, sinus, persistent pain; rising CRP/ESR; the leading cause of early revision (8-12 percent)Dual antibiotic prophylaxis; antibiotic-loaded cement; silver-coated implant in high risk; meticulous soft-tissue handlingAspiration and culture; debridement with antibiotics and often staged implant exchange; amputation in 20-30 percent of infected cases
Wound dehiscence / skin necrosisEdge necrosis or dehiscence, especially after neoadjuvant radiation; large dead spaceCareful flap handling; prophylactic gastrocnemius flap when coverage is marginal; drains and compressive dressingsEarly plastic surgery input; flap coverage before superficial breakdown becomes deep infection
Extensor lag greater than 15 degreesQuadriceps weakness and poor active extension; functional limpTension the patellar tendon repair so the knee flexes to 90 degrees; protect in a brace for 4-6 weeksBracing and therapy; revision of the tendon reconstruction or Trevira augmentation if disabling
Aseptic loosening (intermediate)Progressive pain and radiolucent lines at the stem or cement mantle; 10-15 percent at 10 years for cemented stemsCorrect stem diameter and cement mantle; consider compress fixation in young active patientsRule out infection first; revise to a longer stem or a compress construct
Periprosthetic fracture at the stem tipPain after minor trauma; fracture at the stem-bone junction on radiographAvoid over- or under-reaming; prophylactic cerclage cables in osteopenic boneRevision with a longer stem bypassing the fracture, plus cerclage wiring
Hinge mechanism wear or dislocationInstability, clicking or locking; a sudden change in stabilityCorrect component rotation (tibial tubercle and epicondylar axis); avoid hyperextensionHinge or liner exchange; revision if the component is malrotated
Local recurrence (oncologic)Pain or a mass at the resection bed; change on MRI; 5-15 percentNegative margins (greater than 2 cm marrow confirmed on frozen section); en bloc excision of the biopsy tractRe-stage; wide re-resection versus amputation, and re-plan the reconstruction
Stem fracture / fatigue failure (late)Sudden pain or instability after years of use; mechanical failure on imagingCounsel the patient to avoid high-impact activities permanentlyRevision of the failed segment

Viva & Exam Focus


Mnemonic

MEGAPROMEGAPROSTHESIS — operative sequence

M
Medial parapatellar approach
Extensile; protects the extensor mechanism; extends proximally and distally as needed
E
Extensor mechanism protected
Tag the patellar tendon early; maintain continuity with the tibial tubercle
G
Greater than 2 cm marrow margin
Confirmed on frozen section before the final osteotomy
A
Anterior flange of the tibial component
For patellar tendon reattachment or Trevira tube augmentation
P
Porous collar in direct bone contact
No cement interposed — extracortical bridging and stress transfer
R
Rotating hinge assembled and tested
Confirmed stable through full range before final cementation
O
Oncologic surveillance and infection prophylaxis
Discussed with the patient preoperatively

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud

Viva scenarioAdvanced
Clinical prompt

“A 22-year-old man presents with a distal femoral osteosarcoma. MRI shows the tumour extending to within 1 cm of the physis with no skip lesions. Staging CT chest and bone scan are negative. How do you plan the resection and reconstruction?”

Viva scenarioAdvanced
Clinical prompt

“A 68-year-old woman with a previous distal femoral replacement for sarcoma now has catastrophic loosening of the femoral stem with 8 cm of bone loss and a periprosthetic fracture. She has no evidence of recurrence. How do you revise her reconstruction?”

Viva scenarioAdvanced
Clinical prompt

“You are planning a distal femoral megaprosthesis in a 35-year-old man with a high-grade osteosarcoma. He asks about the risk of infection and whether a silver-coated implant would be beneficial. How do you counsel him?”

Exam day cheat sheet
Distal femoral megaprosthesis — exam-day essentials

Indications

  • Primary distal femoral sarcoma (osteosarcoma, Ewing, chondrosarcoma) with no metastases and a resectable lesion
  • Catastrophic periprosthetic distal femoral bone loss after TKA when conventional revision is impossible
  • Failed limb salvage with massive allograft or previous megaprosthesis requiring revision
  • Solitary metastatic lesion with impending fracture not amenable to curettage and augmentation

Critical anatomy

  • Popliteal vessels lie directly posterior to the distal femur — identify and loop early
  • Sciatic nerve divides at the upper popliteal fossa — protect throughout the resection
  • Patellar tendon insertion on the tibial tubercle must be preserved or reconstructed
  • Collateral ligaments are sacrificed; the rotating hinge compensates for stability
  • Porous collar must contact bone directly — no cement interposition

Resection principles

  • Greater than 2 cm marrow margin beyond T2 signal on MRI, confirmed on frozen section
  • Biopsy tract excised en bloc with the specimen
  • Send a 1 cm marrow margin for frozen section before completing the osteotomy
  • Maintain orientation of the specimen for pathologic analysis

Fixation

  • Cemented stem: most common, immediate weight-bearing, antibiotic cement reduces infection
  • Compress / porous collar: lower aseptic loosening in young patients with good bone
  • Uncemented press-fit: requires good diaphyseal bone; less suitable after radiation
  • Never cement over the porous collar — direct bone contact is required for bridging
  • Stem diameter chosen for a 2-3 mm cement mantle or a tight press-fit

Extensor mechanism

  • Patellar tendon reattachment to the anterior tibial flange or Trevira tube augmentation
  • Tension the repair so the knee flexes to 90 degrees without excessive suture pull
  • Locked brace in extension for 4-6 weeks postoperatively
  • An extensor lag greater than 15 degrees severely impairs function
  • A gastrocnemius rotation flap is useful for coverage and tendon augmentation in revision

Complications & rehab

  • Infection 8-15 percent; leading early failure mode; silver coating reduces the risk
  • Aseptic loosening: dominant late failure for cemented stems, 10-15 percent at 10 years
  • Periprosthetic fracture at the stem tip: stress riser; prophylactic cerclage in osteopenic bone
  • Brace locked in extension 4-6 weeks; aim for 90 degrees flexion by 8 weeks and 110 by 12
  • Oncologic surveillance: MRI and CT chest every 3 months for 2 years, then 6-monthly to 5 years

Background & Evidence


Outcomes. Wide resection with megaprosthesis reconstruction achieves local control rates of 85-95 percent at 5 years when negative margins are obtained; overall survival depends on histologic grade and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy rather than the reconstruction itself. Limb salvage is possible in greater than 90 percent of distal femoral sarcomas with modern techniques. Cemented modular megaprostheses demonstrate 70-80 percent survival at 10 years and 50-60 percent at 20 years, with aseptic loosening and infection the dominant failure modes. Compress (force-directed) fixation with a porous collar shows improved 10-year survival (greater than 85 percent) in selected young patients with good bone stock. Surgical anatomy. The distal femur consists of the metaphysis, the medial and lateral condyles, and the trochlear groove; the flat popliteal surface lies immediately anterior to the popliteal vessels. The linea aspera gives attachment to the adductors and origin to the vastus medialis and lateralis. The epicondyles bear the collateral ligaments, which are sacrificed in a distal femoral replacement. The sciatic nerve lies in the posterior compartment and divides into the tibial and common peroneal nerves at the superior angle of the popliteal fossa; the popliteal artery lies directly on the posterior surface of the distal femur, separated only by a thin layer of fat and the joint capsule; and the genicular arteries form an anastomosis around the knee that must be controlled during the approach. The quadriceps tendon inserts on the superior pole of the patella and the patellar tendon continues to the tibial tubercle; the vastus medialis obliquus is a key dynamic stabiliser that must be preserved or repaired. Implant design. Current-generation megaprostheses are modular, allowing intraoperative length adjustment and hinge orientation; the rotating hinge reduces torsional stress at the bone-implant interface compared with fixed-hinge designs. Popular systems include the Global Modular Replacement System (Stryker), the MUTARS system (Implantcast), and the Compress device (Biomet).

10-year survival
Cemented stem
70-80 percent
Compress / porous collar
Greater than 85 percent (selected young patients)
Aseptic loosening
Cemented stem
10-15 percent at 10 years
Compress / porous collar
Less than 5 percent at 10 years
Infection rate
Cemented stem
8-12 percent
Compress / porous collar
6-10 percent (silver coating reduces this)
Immediate weight-bearing
Cemented stem
Yes
Compress / porous collar
Yes
Best suited to
Cemented stem
Most tumour reconstructions; osteopenic or irradiated bone
Compress / porous collar
Young patients with good diaphyseal bone
Technical demand
Cemented stem
Lower
Compress / porous collar
Higher — precise bone preparation required
Cemented versus compress fixation — evidence summary
OutcomeCemented stemCompress / porous collar
10-year survival70-80 percentGreater than 85 percent (selected young patients)
Aseptic loosening10-15 percent at 10 yearsLess than 5 percent at 10 years
Infection rate8-12 percent6-10 percent (silver coating reduces this)
Immediate weight-bearingYesYes
Best suited toMost tumour reconstructions; osteopenic or irradiated boneYoung patients with good diaphyseal bone
Technical demandLowerHigher — precise bone preparation required

References


Evidence

Implant survival and factors associated with failure of cemented custom-made distal femoral megaprostheses after tumor resection

Level III
Apostolopoulos V, Mahdal M, Kubíček M, et al. • SICOT J (2026)
Key Findings:
  • Implant survival analysis of cemented custom-made distal femoral megaprostheses identified key failure factors after tumour resection
Source: SICOT-J 2026;12:20
Verify on PubMed (PMID 42053186)
Evidence

Evaluation of Zimmer® segmental distal femur mega-prostheses: Patient survival, surgical outcomes and functional outcome

Level III
Holm CE, Bömers JP, Villadsen A, et al. • J Bone Oncol (2025)
Key Findings:
  • Zimmer segmental distal femur megaprostheses demonstrated patient survival, surgical and functional outcomes in tumour cases
Source: J Bone Oncol 2025;55:100722
Verify on PubMed (PMID 41277947)
Evidence

Exploring the Influence of Surgeon and Hospital Procedural Volume on the Outcomes of Distal Femoral Replacement: An Australian National Joint Replacement Registry Analysis

Level III
Bhanushali A, Lourens EC, Harries D, et al. • ANZ J Surg (2026)
Key Findings:
  • Higher surgeon and hospital procedural volume improved outcomes of distal femoral replacement in registry analysis
Source: ANZ J Surg 2026 Mar;96(3):458-471
Verify on PubMed (PMID 41449953)
Evidence

Revision Distal Femoral Replacements Have a More-Than-40% Failure and Reoperation Rate

Level III
Parikh N, Lam AD, Hohmann AL, et al. • J Arthroplasty (2025)
Key Findings:
  • Revision distal femoral replacements carry a greater than 40 percent failure and reoperation rate in a large cohort analysis
Source: J Arthroplasty 2025 Sep;40(9S1):S463-S469
Verify on PubMed (PMID 40368077)
Editorially reviewed — transparent references and correction processPublished by OrthoVellum Medical Education TeamEditorial boardMethodologyReview policy
Educational disclosure

Educational content is reviewed for source visibility, editorial coherence, and correction readiness.

No individual clinician credential is claimed unless a named person is shown.

Verify before clinical use; this is not medical advice or a substitute for local guidance.

Procedure console
28 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed · 2026-06-20
Procedure info
Level
advanced
Read time
28 min
Updated
2026-06-20
SURGICAL APPROACHES USED
Medial Parapatellar Approach to Knee
Browse all procedures