Literature DB >> 30415673

Treatment of pathologic fractures of the proximal femur.

Andrea Angelini1, Giulia Trovarelli1, Antonio Berizzi1, Elisa Pala1, Anna Breda1, Marco Maraldi1, Pietro Ruggieri2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Metastatic lesions to the proximal femur occur frequently and require special consideration due to the high risk of pathologic fractures. Type of surgery might influence patient survival considering the growing concept of oligometastases. In fact, the use of modular tumor megaprosthesis is increasing in the last decades compared to intramedullary nailing. Aim of this study was to evaluate oncological and functional results of treatment in patients with pathologic or impending fracture of the proximal femur, with patient survival being the primary, complications the secondary, and functional results the tertiary endpoint.
METHODS: Between 2016 and 2017, 40 patients with pathologic fracture (29 cases) or impending fracture according to the Mirels score (11 cases) of the proximal femur, were treated in our Institute and prospectively collected. There were 29 females (72.5%) and 11 males (27.5%), with a mean age at diagnosis of the metastasis of 63.6 years (range 35 to 92 years). Patients were treated due to bone metastases (commonly develop from breast cancer) or hematologic malignancies. Considering number of lesions, 17 patients had less than three bone metastases. Surgical procedures included intramedullary nailing (7 patients), conventional endoprosthesis (4 patients) and modular endoprosthetic replacement (29 patients). Adjuvant treatments included chemotherapy (13 cases), radiation therapy (8 cases) or both (15 cases), and selective arterial embolization (6 pre-op). Oncological results were evaluated considering the survival of patients. Functional results were assessed as pain intensity in VAS score and MSTS score.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up of patients was 10.2 months (range 6-26.3 years). At the latest evaluation, 23 patients were alive with disease, 3 patients were alive without evidence of disease and 14 patients were dead with disease. There was a significant better survival in patients treated with PFR compared to IMN and EPR groups (p = 0.0080). No differences in term of survival were found comparing impending vs actual pathological fracture and oligo vs multiple metastases. After surgery, all patients experienced improvement in quality of life resulting from reduction in pain. Mean MSTS score was 22.4. The overall complications rate was 22.5%. The most frequent complication was dislocation followed by wound dehiscence and deep infections.
CONCLUSION: Modular tumour prosthesis for proximal femur replacement provides good functional outcome, relative low incidence of complications and higher life quality in the medium term. Oncologic results were influenced by type of surgery, biased by the correct indications for resection and nailing. Preoperative general health condition, life expectancy and ambulatory capacity may influence treatment strategy. With the numbers available, the patients with actual pathologic or impending fracture of the proximal femur treated with resection had a significantly higher survival, especially those with metastases from renal carcinoma or multiple myeloma.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Megaprosthesis; Metastasis; Oligometastasis; Pathologic fracture; Proximal femur; Treatment

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30415673     DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.09.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  10 in total

1.  Is Delayed Time to Surgery Associated with Increased Short-term Complications in Patients with Pathologic Hip Fractures?

Authors:  Nathan H Varady; Bishoy T Ameen; Antonia F Chen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 4.755

2.  Cemented versus cementless megaprosthesis in proximal femur metastatic disease: A systematic review.

Authors:  Maria Serena Oliva; Raffaele Vitiello; Michele Cauteruccio; Elisa Pesare; Giuseppe Rovere; Cesare Meschini; Francesco Liuzza; Giulio Maccauro; Antonio Ziranu
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2020-06-26

3.  Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study.

Authors:  Michala Skovlund Sørensen; Peter Frederik Horstmann; Klaus Hindsø; Michael Mørk Petersen
Journal:  J Bone Oncol       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 4.072

4.  Radiation Therapy in Conjunction With Surgical Stabilization of Impending or Pathologic Fractures Secondary to Metastasis: Is There a Difference Between Single and Multifraction Regimens?

Authors:  Ryan D Kraus; Christopher R Weil; Stacey Wells; Jonathan D Tward; John S Groundland; Kevin B Jones; Donald M Cannon
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-09-10

5.  Cemented long versus standard femoral stem in proximal femoral metastasis: a noninferiority single-blinded quasi-randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Ibrahim Mahmoud Abdelmonem; Sherif Ishak Azmy; Ayman Mohammad El Masry; Ahmed K El Ghazawy; Ahmed Sayed Kotb; Ayman Abdelaziz Bassiony
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-02-13       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  Intramedullary nailing vs modular megaprosthesis in extracapsular metastases of proximal femur: clinical outcomes and complication in a retrospective study.

Authors:  Raffaele Vitiello; Carlo Perisano; Tommaso Greco; Luigi Cianni; Chiara Polichetti; Rocco Maria Comodo; Ivan De Martino; Vincenzo La Vergata; Giulio Maccauro
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-09-13       Impact factor: 2.562

7.  Cemented vs uncemented megaprostheses in proximal femur metastases: a multicentric comparative study.

Authors:  Maria Serena Oliva; Francesco Muratori; Raffaele Vitiello; Antonio Ziranu; Lorenzo Foschi; Giuseppe Rovere; Cesare Meschini; Domenico Andrea Campanacci; Giulio Maccauro
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-09-06       Impact factor: 2.562

Review 8.  Intramedullary nailing for impending or pathologic fracture of the long bone: titanium vs carbon fiber peek nailing.

Authors:  Elisa Pala; Alberto Procura; Giulia Trovarelli; Antonio Berizzi; Pietro Ruggieri
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-08-04

9.  Proximal femur fat fraction variation in healthy subjects using chemical shift-encoding based MRI.

Authors:  Pedro Augusto Gondim Teixeira; Tanguy Cherubin; Sammy Badr; Adrien Bedri; Romain Gillet; Eliane Albuisson; Alain Blum
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-12-27       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Do Disparities in Wait Times to Operative Fixation for Pathologic Fractures of the Long Bones and 30-day Complications Exist Between Black and White Patients? A Study Using the NSQIP Database.

Authors:  Micheal Raad; Varun Puvanesarajah; Kevin Y Wang; Claire M McDaniel; Uma Srikumaran; Adam S Levin; Carol D Morris
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 4.755

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.