Patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) often need renal replacement therapy (RRT）with a high morbidity and mortality. For patients with chronic renal failure, the aim of blood purification is renal replacement; but for patients with AKI, although customarily called RRT, the aim of blood purification is not “renal replacement”, but extracorporeal “renal support and protection”, that is, supporting and protecting temporally failed kidney, removing damage factors, avoiding renal reinjury and looking forward to restore renal function. This article provides a detailed explanation of the differences between renal replacement and renal support from the perspective of organ protection, as well as the key links of RRT and extracorporeal multiple organ support for patients with severe AKI.
The main treatment strategies for hepatic failure include drug therapy, artificial liver support system, and liver transplantation. This article introduces the clinically commonly used non biological artificial liver techniques, including plasma exchange, continuous blood purification, plasma bilirubin adsorption, plasma diafiltration, repeatedly pass albumin dialysis, molecular adsorbent recirculating system, Prometheus system, etc; and discusses how to select different artificial liver techniques according to different clinical manifestation. At the same time, the progress of bioartificial liver in recent years is summarized, and the future development of artificial liver is prospected.
【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the outcome of two-stage revision for prostheses infection in patients with bone tumor after knee prosthetic replacement. Methods Between August 2003 and August 2010, 22 patients with prostheses infection, who underwent knee prosthetic replacement in limb salvage treatment because of bone tumor, received two-stage revision. There were 11 males and 11 females with an average age of 29.6 years (range, 15-55 years). Prosthetic infection occurred after primary replacement in 20 patients and after revision surgery in 2 patients from 15 days to 89 months after operation. According to Coventry and Fitzgerald classification, type I was found in 3 cases, type II in 15 cases, and type III in 4 cases. The time from infection to admission was 5-47 months (mean, 10.2 months). The results of bacterial culture were positive in 9 cases and negative in 13 cases. Two patients had fever and leukocytosis. In one-stage, the implants and infected tissue were removed, and an antibiotic cement spacer with an intramedullary nail was implanted. In two-stage, a new endoprosthesis was inserted after infection was controlled. Results The C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate before one-stage debridement were significantly higher than those before two-stage revision (P lt; 0.05). All patients were followed up 5-63 months (mean, 23.6 months). Infection was controlled after one-stage debridement in 18 cases (81.8%); two-stage revision was performed in 17 cases, and 1 case refused to receive two-stage revision. Of 17 patients, 1 patient was amputated because of infection at 5 months after revision. Four patients (18.2%) underwent amputation because of failure to control infection after one-stage debridement. The limb salvage rate was 77.3% (17/22). One case of renal cell carcinoma with bone metastasis died of original disease after 1 year and 6 months of operation. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS 93) score was 69.4 ± 12.7 at last follow-up. Conclusion Two-stage revision should be performed in time and it has good results in the treatment of prostheses infection in patients with bone sarcomas after knee prosthetic replacement.
Objective To identify the postoperative function and short-term outcome of Global Modular Replacement System (GMRS) for reconstruction of defect after removal of tumor so as to supply information for cl inical appl ication. Methods Between March 2007 and May 2009, 30 l imb-salvage cases reconstructed with GMRS were retrospectively reviewed, including 18 males and 12 females with a median age of 25 years (range, 11-57 years). The preoperative diagnoses were osteosarcoma in 15 cases, mal ignant fibro-histiocytoma in 4, giant cell tumor in 3, chondrosarcoma in 2, and Ewing’s sarcoma and angiosarcoma in 1 respectively. The duration of symptom ranged from 1 to 15 months with an average of 5.6 months. There were 4 revision cases at mean time of 3.4 years after index surgeries. The locations were the proximal femur in 3 cases, distal femur in 22 cases, and proximal tibia in 5 cases. According to Enneking stage, 2 cases were rated as stage IB, 1 as stage IIA, and 27 as stage IIB. Four cases were compl icated by pathologic fracture. Results The average operation time was 165 minutes (range, 120-240 minutes); the mean blood loss was 448.3 mL (range, 100-1 500 mL); and the mean resection length was 14.1 cm (range, 7.5-22.5 cm). All the wounds healed by first intention. All 30 patients were followed up 10-35 months (22.3 months on average). Local recurrence occurred in 2 cases (6.7%) at 5 and 14 months respectively and distal metastasis occurred in 5 cases (16.7%) at 4-12 months (7.3 months on average) postoperatively. One patient died of multiple lung metastases at 10 months postoperatively. Twenty-nine patients survived at last follow-up, including 25 cases of tumor-free survival and 4 cases of tumor bearing survival. Aseptic loosening occurred in 2 cases (6.7%) at 1.5 years and 2 years postoperatively respectively. Deep infection occurred in 1 case (3.3%) at 1 year postoperatively. At last follow-up, the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 scores were 4.6% ± 0.7% for pain, 3.7% ± 0.9% for function, 3.2% ± 1.3% for satisfactory degree, 4.3% ± 0.9% for orthesis, 3.7% ± 0.7% for walking, 3.3% ± 1.0% for gait; total score was 75.9% ± 14.2%. The Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) score was 87.0 ± 7.0. Conclusion Reconstruction for defect after removal of tumor with GMRS has satisfactory short-term outcome with good function recovery and low compl ication rate.
Objective To evaluate the surgical procedure of reinforced acetabular cage with caudal flange in reconstruction of pelvic defect after acetabular tumor resection. Methods Between June 2003 and December 2009, 25 patients with Harrington class III pelvic defect underwent reconstruction with a reinforced acetabular cage with caudal flange and total hip arthroplasty (THA). There were 13 males and 12 females with an average age of 51.2 years (range，13-73 years). The main cl inical manifestations included hip pain and buttock pain, with a median disease duration of 6 months (range, 1-96 months). Pathological findings showed 18 cases of metastasis, 3 cases of multiple myeloma, 1 case of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, 1 case of grade I chondrosarcoma, 1 case of giant cell tumor, and 1 case of chondroblastoma. For the patient with chondroblastoma, THA with LINK RIBBED system was used. An artificial total hip system made in China was used in 6 patients and LINK SP II system was used in the other 18 patients. Results No patients died perioperatively. Deep infection and hip dislocations occurred in 1 and 2 patients, respectively. At last follow-up, 8 of 18 patients with metastasis died of cancer and the average survival time was 11 months. The other 10 who were al ive were followed up 15 months on average. One patient with multiple myeloma died of pulmonary infection at 21 months after operation and the other 2 with multiple myeloma and 1 with lymphoma were al ive with an average follow-up of 17 months. The patient with grade I chondrosarcoma and patient with chondroblastoma were followed up 58 and 12 months, respectively, without recurrence. Recurrence occurred in the patient with giant cell tumor at 19 months afteroperation. Loosening of implant occurred in 3 patients because of local tumor recurrence. For the 23 patients at 6 months after operation, the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 score was 81% (range, 57%-93%). Conclusion Reinforced acetabular cage with caudal flange could be used together with THA for reconstruction of Harrington class III pelvic defects after acetabular tumor resection, and low incidence of postoperative compl ication and good functional outcome could be expected.
Objective To evaluate the surgical skill, cause of revision, compl ications, prosthetic survival and postoperative function in revision of custom-made tumor prosthesis replacement of knee joint. Methods The cl inical data of 33 patients who received prosthetic revision surgery between June 2002 and June 2007 were reviewed. There were 17 malesand 16 females with an average age of 33.1 years (range, 16-67 years). The pathological diagnosis included 17 osteosarcomas, 11 giant cell tumors, 2 mal ignant fibrous histocytomas, 1 chondrosarcoma, 1 synovial sarcoma, and 1 l iposarcoma. The involved locations were distal femur in 22 cases and proximal tibia in 11 cases. The average interval between first prosthetic replacement and revision surgery was 45.3 months (range, 6-180 months). The reason for revision included local recurrence in 2 cases, deep infection in 8 cases, aseptic loosening in 7 cases, peri prosthetic fracture in 1 case, prosthetic stem fracture in 6 cases, and prosthetic hinge failure in 9 cases. Six patients with deep infection received two-stage revision surgery, while the other 27 patients received one-stage revision. Cemented prostheses were used in all patients. Allograft prosthetic composite and revisions were used in 2 patients who had deficit of diaphysis for stem fixation. Results In 17 patients who received both primary prosthetic replacement and revision, the operative time was (149.8 ± 40.5) minutes and (189.9 ± 43.8) minutes, and the blood loss was (605.2 ± 308.0) mL and (834.1 ± 429.9) mL for primary prosthetic replacement and revision, respectively; all showing statistically significant differences (P lt; 0.05). The mean time of follow-up was 45.1 months (range, 12-76 months). Heal ing between allograft and host bone was obtained in 2 patients with allograft prosthetic composite and revision after 1.5 years and 2 years, respectively. After revision surgery, 3 patients died of lung metastasis after 12-24 months, and other 3 patients havinglung metastasis were al ive with disease. Nine (30%) compl ications occurred in 30 patients who were al ive at last follow-up. The compl ications included wound infection in 2 patients, deep infection in 5 patients, mechanical problems in 2 patients. Prosthetic failure occurred in 7 patients (23.3%). The 5-year survival rate of revised prosthesis was 68.6%. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score at 6 months after revision (73.6% ± 14.4%) was significantly improved (P lt; 0.01) when compared with before revision (57.1% ± 10.6%). Conclusion The main reasons for revision of custom-made tumor prosthesis of knee joint were mechanical problems and deep infection. Although revision surgery of knee is relatively compl icated and has some compl ications, a functional l imb could be maintained in most tumor patients.
Objective To investigate the surgical characteristics and preliminary effectiveness of Orthofix unilateral external fixator in the treatment of musculoskeletal tumors. Methods Twenty-two patients received Orthofix unilateral external fixator treatment for bone defect after tumor excision or complications after limb salvage surgery between June 2011 and March 2016. There were 11 males and 11 females with a median age of 23.5 years (range, 4-57 years). The bone defect or limb length discrepancy after tumor resection was at proximal femur in 6 cases, distal femur in 8 cases, diaphysis of femur in 3 cases, proximal tibia in 2 cases, and diaphysis of tibia in 3 cases. The external fixation was used for temporary fixation after reconstruction of bone defect in 10 cases [the length of bone defect was 6-19 cm (mean, 12.3 cm); using vascularized fibular graft in 2 cases, allograft bone and free fibular graft in 2 cases, allograft bone and autogenous bone graft in 5 cases, allograft bone reconstruction in 1 case]; bone distraction lengthening for limb length discrepancy in 5 cases [the length of shortening was 6.5-8.5 cm (mean, 7.5 cm)]; temporary fixation after open biopsy in 3 cases; bone transportation over locking plate in 1 case (the length of bone defect was 7.5 cm); fixation for preoperatively pathology fracture in 1 case; and joint distraction for dislocation after tumor ablation in 2 cases. Results All the patients were followed up 12-72 months (mean, 36 months). In 10 patients with bone defect reconstruction, the wearing external fixator time was 3-8 months (mean, 4.8 months); all got bone union with the healing time of 3-16 months (mean, 6.4 months); the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society 93 (MSTS 93) score was 73.3-93.3 (mean, 87.2); and no complication occurred during wearing external fixator. In 5 patients with bone distraction lengthening for limb length discrepancy, the wearing external fixator time was 7-15 months; 2 patients had axial deviation during distraction and2 had greenstick fracture after apparatus removal; pin site infection was observed in 2 cases with grade 1 and 1 case with grade 2 according to Checketts-Otterburn classification system; the MSTS 93 score was 80.0-96.7 (mean, 89.2). The remaining patients had no complications, the knee and ankle joint movement was normal. Conclusion Orthofix unilateral external fixator can be used in fixation for complex bone defect after tumor resection and to correct limb length discrepancy after limb salvage surgery.