Literature DB >> 36056967

Lumbopelvic shortening and local host bone-to-host bone reconstruction: a surgical method for lumbopelvic fusion following total sacrectomy.

Ahmed Cherry1, Colby Oitment2, Jay Wunder3,4, Peter Ferguson3,4, Raja Rampersaud3,5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Primary sacral tumors are rare, representing fewer than 7% of spinal neoplasms. Following total sacrectomy, lumbopelvic instrumentation and fusion carries a high risk of non-union with no current consensus on fixation techniques to augment bony defects. We aim to describe the outcome of a reconstruction technique following total sacrectomy whereby lumbopelvic shortening is performed and the posterior pelvic ring is compressed to enable contact with the native L5 vertebra.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 2 patients with 2 and 7 years post-operative follow-up. A review of hospital records including clinical assessments, complications, pathology and imaging reports.
RESULTS: Patient 1 was a 17-years-old male with recurrent sacral chondrosarcoma, who presented with lumbosacral neuropathic pain and radiculopathy after failed intralesional surgery. Patient 2 was a 51-years-old male with chronic low back pain caused by a large low-grade chondroid sacral chordoma. Reconstruction technique involved mobilizing the L5 vertebra into the pelvis and pelvic ring closure to obtain host-bone-to-bone contact, eliminating the need for alternative grafts. Post-operative complications included superficial abdominal wound drainage, lower limb DVT, pulmonary emboli and deep pelvic infection. Serial CT scans demonstrated bony fusion in both patients. Neither patients had evidence of tumor recurrence and were able to ambulate at recent follow-up. Imaging demonstrated changed acetabular version of - 4.6/- 8.1 and - 14.4/- 14.8 (patient 1/2, R/L, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Primary lumbopelvic shortening represents an alternative local autograft reconstructive technique for management of large sacral defects following total sacrectomy. This technique obviates the additional morbidity and surgical cost associated with the use of previously described techniques.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Pelvic reconstruction; Sacral chondrosarcoma primary spinal neoplasm; Sacral chordomas; Spinal shortening

Year:  2022        PMID: 36056967     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07363-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   2.721


  18 in total

Review 1.  Imaging features of primary and secondary malignant tumours of the sacrum.

Authors:  E Thornton; K M Krajewski; K N O'Regan; A A Giardino; J P Jagannathan; N Ramaiya
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Chordoma of the sacrum: "en bloc" total sacrectomy and lumbopelvic reconstruction.

Authors:  Peter Paul Varga; Aron Lazary
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  En bloc resection in the spine: a procedure of surgical oncology.

Authors:  Stefano Boriani
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-09

4.  Restoration of Spinopelvic Continuity with the Free Fibula Flap after Limb-Sparing Oncologic Resection Is Associated with a High Union Rate and Superior Functional Outcomes.

Authors:  Alexander F Mericli; Stefanos Boukovalas; Margaret S Roubaud; Carrie Kai-Cheng Chu; Justin Bird; Valerae O Lewis; Laurence D Rhines; Edward I Chang; David M Adelman; Matthew M Hanasono
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, custom-made prosthesis after total en bloc sacrectomy: a technical note.

Authors:  Ran Wei; Wei Guo; Tao Ji; Yidan Zhang; Haijie Liang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Can the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator predict postoperative complications in patients undergoing sacral tumor resection for chordoma?

Authors:  Matthew T Houdek; Mario Hevesi; Anthony M Griffin; Michael J Yaszemski; Franklin H Sim; Peter C Ferguson; Peter S Rose; Jay S Wunder
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 7.  Surgical techniques for spinopelvic reconstruction following total sacrectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  S Samuel Bederman; Kalpit N Shah; Jeffrey M Hassan; Bang H Hoang; P Douglas Kiester; Nitin N Bhatia
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Complications, secondary interventions and long term morbidity after en bloc sacrectomy.

Authors:  J J Verlaan; J S Kuperus; W B Slooff; A Hennipman; F C Oner
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-12-27       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Tumors of the pelvis: complications after reconstruction.

Authors:  A Hillmann; C Hoffmann; G Gosheger; R Rödl; W Winkelmann; T Ozaki
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2003-06-28       Impact factor: 3.067

10.  Imaging appearances and clinical outcome following sacrectomy and ilio-lumbar reconstruction for sacral neoplasia.

Authors:  Marianna Thomas; A M Davies; A J Stirling; R J Grimer; M Grainger; Steven L J James
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2013-11-17       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.