Extra-articular shoulder resections: outcomes of 54 patients

Reconstruction with a double-constrained implant design after complex shoulder extra-articular resection

BACKGROUND

Approximately, one-third of patients with tumors of proximal humerus will require an extra-articular resection to achieve oncologic margins. This procedure yields poor functional outcomes with a considerable rate of revisions. Unconstrained implants are prone to instability hindering also function of the elbow and hand, whereas constrained shoulder reconstructions suffer from early aseptic loosening of the glenoid component due to bone overload. The purpose of this study was to develop a constrained implant suitable for extra-articular resection with loss of function in deltoid and rotator cuff, which would provide both stability and passive motion, whilst also decreasing the risk of aseptic loosening of the glenoid component.

METHODS

In cooperation with Czech Technical University in Prague, we devised an implant consisting of two constrained joints in series connected by a dumbbell piece. The biomechanical analysis showed a reduction of load transfer to the glenoid component with a torque of 8.6 Nm capable of generating an 865-N pulling force on bone screw to just 0.07 Nm, hence shielding the glenoid component from undesired forces and decreasing the risk of aseptic loosening. Three patients with extra-articular resection with a total loss of function of both rotator cuff and deltoid muscle received this type of reconstruction. The average follow-up was 16 months.

RESULTS

The surgical technique is straightforward. The surgery took 175 min on average with average blood loss of 516 ml. There were no surgical- or implant-related complications. All three patients were pain-free and had a stable shoulder joint after the reconstruction. All had fully functional elbow, wrist, and hand joints. The average Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was 21/30 (70%). All patients were pleased with the results.

CONCLUSION

The presented innovative implant design has demonstrated to be a promising alternative for reconstruction in these challenging cases.

Total humerus replacement with reverse shoulder design for non-oncologic indication: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Reconstruction of large skeletal defects pose significant challenges for orthopedic surgeons, particularly in cases of chronic skeletal defects where the surrounding structures differ substantially from the original anatomical structures, further complicating management.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 54 year old male patient presented with a large skeletal defect after osteomyelitis surgery. The treatment of choice for this case was reconstruction using a total humerus megaprosthesis. The prosthesis was custom-designed with a reversed shoulder joint and a total elbow joint, which were 3D printed using CT-Scan imaging.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

A short-term follow-up revealed improvements for the patient in arm functionality and expectation-based satisfaction at 6 months post-surgery.

CONCLUSION

Total humerus megaprosthesis joint replacement may be a promising option for treating chronic humeral defects.

Comparison of outcomes following pedicled and free flap transfers for the defect after shoulder sarcoma resection

BACKGROUND

Reconstruction after wide resection of a sarcoma arising in the shoulder girdle is challenging, and little evidence is available to compare short-term outcomes between pedicled-flap and free-flap reconstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients undergoing immediate reconstruction surgery with only a pedicled-flap (n = 18) and with a free-flap (n = 20) after sarcoma resection on the shoulder girdle between July 2005 and March 2022 were identified. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Transferred flaps survived completely in 20 cases in the free-flap group. In the all-patient analysis of binary outcomes, the occurrences of total complications, takebacks, total flap complications, and flap dehiscence were higher in the pedicled-flap group than in the free-flap group. The propensity score-matched analysis showed the occurrence of total complications was significantly higher in the pedicled-flap group than the free-flap group (53.8% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.03). In the propensity score-matched analysis of continuous outcomes, the pedicled-flap group demonstrated a shorter operation time than the free-flap group (279 vs. 381 min, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical study demonstrated the feasibility and reliability of a free-flap transfer for the defect after wide resection of a sarcoma arising in the shoulder girdle.

Implant Survival, Clinical Outcome and Complications of Megaprosthetic Reconstructions Following Sarcoma Resection

Simple Summary

Malignant bone and soft tissue tumors are usually surgically removed with an envelope of healthy tissue as a barrier. If located in the long bones of the upper and lower extremity, this approach leads to a large bone defect commonly affecting a joint. One way to rebuild the bone defect and the neighboring joint is the use of a megaprosthesis that is anchored in the remaining bone comparable to a conventional joint replacement. In general this approach is popular as it provides early stability and allows the affected patient to begin rehabilitation early on. However, complications leading to long-term unplanned reoperation are common. This article provides an overview of current implant survival, types of complication and long-term outcomes of megaprostheses used following tumor resection.

Abstract

Megaprosthetic reconstruction of segmental bone defects following sarcoma resection is a frequently chosen surgical approach in orthopedic oncology. While the use of megaprostheses has gained popularity over the last decades and such implants are increasingly used for metastatic reconstructions and in non-tumor cases, there still is a high risk of long-term complications leading to revision surgery. This article investigates current implant survivorship, frequency and types of complications as well as functional outcomes of upper and lower limb megaprosthetic reconstructions.

What Is the Implant Survivorship and Functional Outcome After Total Humeral Replacement in Patients with Primary Bone Tumors?

BACKGROUND

Total humeral replacement is an option to reconstruct massive bone defects after resection of locally advanced bone tumors of the humerus. However, implant survivorship, potential risk factors for implant revision surgery, and functional results of total humeral replacement are poorly elucidated because of the rarity of the procedure.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) What is the revision-free implant and overall limb survivorship after total humerus replacement? (2) What factors are associated with implant revision surgery? (3) What is the functional outcome of the procedure as determined by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score?

METHODS

Between August 1999 and December 2018, 666 patients underwent megaprosthetic reconstruction after resection of a primary malignant or locally aggressive/rarely metastasizing tumor of the long bones at our department. In all, 23% (154) of these patients had a primary tumor located in the humerus. During the study, we performed total humeral replacement in all patients with a locally advanced sarcoma, in patients with pathological fractures, in patients with skip metastases, or in patients with previous intralesional contaminating surgery, who would have no sufficient bone stock for a stable implant fixation for a single joint megaprosthetic replacement of the proximal or distal humerus. We performed no biological reconstructions or reconstructions with allograft-prosthetic composites. As a result, 5% (33 of 666) of patients underwent total humerus replacement. Six percent (2 of 33) of patients were excluded because they received a custom-made, three-dimensionally (3-D) printed hemiprosthesis, leaving 5% (31) of the initial 666 patients for inclusion in our retrospective analysis. Of these, 6% (2 of 31) had surgery more than 5 years ago, but they had not been seen in the last 5 years. Median (interquartile range) age at the time of surgery was 15 years (14 to 25 years), and indications for total humeral replacement were primary malignant bone tumors (n = 30) and a recurring, rarely metastasizing bone tumor (n = 1). All megaprosthetic reconstructions were performed with a single modular system. The implanted prostheses were silver-coated beginning in 2006, and beginning in 2010, a reverse proximal humerus component was used when appropriate. We analyzed endoprosthetic complications descriptively and assessed the functional outcome of all surviving patients who did not undergo secondary amputation using the 1993 MSTS score and the ASES score. The median (IQR) follow-up in all survivors was 75 months (50 to 122 months), with a minimum follow-up period of 25 months. We evaluated the following factors for possible association with implant revision surgery: age, BMI, reconstruction length, duration of surgery, extraarticular resection, pathological fracture, previous intralesional surgery, (neo-)adjuvant radio- and chemotherapy, and metastatic disease.

RESULTS

The revision-free implant survivorship at 1 year was 77% (95% confidence interval 58% to 89%) and 74% (95% CI 55% to 86%) at 5 years. The overall limb survivorship was 93% (95% CI 75% to 98%) after 1 and after 5 years. We found revision-free survivorship to be lower in patients with extraarticular shoulder resection compared with intraarticular resections (50% [95% CI 21% to 74%] versus 89% [95% CI 64% to 97%]) after 5 years (subhazard ratios for extraarticular resections 4.4 [95% CI 1.2 to 16.5]; p = 0.03). With the number of patients available for our analysis, we could not detect a difference in revision-free survivorship at 5 years between patients who underwent postoperative radiotherapy (40% [95% CI 5% to 75%]) and patients who did not (81% [95% CI 60% to 92%]; p = 0.09). The median (IQR) MSTS score in 9 of 13 surviving patients after a median follow-up of 75 months (51 to 148 months) was 87% (67% to 92%), and the median ASES score was 83 (63 to 89) of 100 points, with higher scores representing better function.

CONCLUSION

Total humeral replacement after resection of locally advanced bone tumors appears to be associated with a good functional outcome in patients who do not die of their tumors, which in our study was approximately one- third of those who were treated with a resection and total humerus prosthesis. However, the probability of early prosthetic revision surgery is high, especially in patients undergoing extraarticular resections, who should be counseled accordingly. Still, our results suggest that if the prosthesis survives the first year, further risk for revision appears to be low. Future studies should reexamine the effect of postoperative radiotherapy on implant survival in a larger cohort and evaluate whether the use of soft tissue coverage with plastic reconstructive surgery might decrease the risk of early revisions, especially in patients undergoing extraarticular resections.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Imaging following surgery for primary appendicular bone tumours

Primary bone tumours are uncommon, with sarcomas accounting for < 0.2% of all malignancies. The survival rate of primary bone sarcomas has significantly improved due to (neo)adjuvant therapy, while improved surgical techniques and development of new prostheses have shifted the surgical focus from amputation to limb preservation in the vast majority of patients. A wide variety of surgical options are available for the treatment of primary bone tumours which depend upon histological diagnosis, their appearance at the time of presentation and response to any (neo)adjuvant therapy as required. This review is intended to help radiologists familiarise themselves with the management of primary appendicular bone tumours and expected normal postoperative appearances for the various surgical techniques, and to recognise potential complications.

Proximal Humerus Reconstruction after Tumor Resection: An Overview of Surgical Management

Proximal humerus is one of the anatomical sites that are most frequently involved by bone and soft tissue malignant tumors. Alone or in association with adjuvant treatments, surgery represents the main therapeutic option to treat and eradicate these diseases. Once the first-line option, in the last decades, amputation lost its role as treatment of choice for the large majority of cases in favor of the modern limb sparing surgery that promises to preserve anatomy and-as much as possible-upper limb functionality. Currently, the main approaches used to replace proximal humerus after a wide resection in oncologic surgery can be summarized in biological reconstructions (allografts and autografts), prosthetic reconstructions (anatomic endoprostheses, total reverse shoulder prostheses), and graft-prosthetic composite reconstructions. The purpose of this overview is to present nowadays surgical options for proximal humerus reconstruction in oncological patients, with their respective advantages and disadvantages.

A reconstructive algorithm of oncologic defects of the upper trunk and shoulder girdle: Factors predicting complexity and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced malignancies of the upper torso and shoulder girdle (UT-SG) necessitate extensive resection and complex reconstruction. Due to the infrequent nature of these operations, a global reconstructive algorithm has not been defined.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who received reconstructive surgery following malignant tumor extirpation in the UT-SG from 2008 to 2018 at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Factors predicting the need for flap reconstruction and risk for postoperative complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 252 procedures met inclusion criteria. The most common pathology was sarcoma (76%) and 52% were primary tumors. The median defect area was 112 cm² (range 4-1350 cm² ). Reconstructive techniques included pedicled flaps (46%), local tissue rearrangement (38%), and free flaps (16%). On univariate analysis, the probability of needing a free flap increased 39% when the defect size increased by 100 cm² . The strongest independent predictors of requiring a free flap were major vessel exposure (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 4.92, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-17.84, P = .015) and major peripheral nerve exposure (adjusted OR = 3.2, 95% CI, 1.1-9.2, P = .031).

CONCLUSION

Despite the aggressive nature of their malignancies, patients requiring an UT-SG resection demonstrate high survival rates and therefore demand a durable reconstruction. Exposed critical structures and defect size were predictive of free tissue transfer.

Endoprosthetic Reconstruction of the Upper Extremity in Oncologic Surgery

In 1943, Austin Moore successfully reconstructed a proximal femur using a Vitallium endoprosthesis. This marked the first successful alternative to amputation in oncologic surgery. However, it was not until the introduction of high-resolution axial imaging and improved chemotherapeutics that the feasibility of limb salvage began to improve. Today, limb salvage surgery can be used to treat most oncologic conditions of the extremities, the most popular reconstruction option being endoprostheses. Megaprostheses use has expanded to nononcologic indications with severe bone loss, including infections, revision arthroplasty, and severe periarticular trauma and its sequelae. The proximal humerus and scapula are challenging for reconstruction, given the complex anatomy of the brachial plexus, the accompanying vascular structures, and the dynamic stabilizers of the relatively nonstable glenohumeral joint. The midhumerus is difficult because of the close location of the radial nerve, whereas the distal humerus is challenging because of the proximity of the brachial artery and its bifurcation, radial, ulnar, and median nerves, and lack of soft-tissue coverage. Despite these challenges, this review demonstrates that many series show excellent mid- to long-term results for pain relief and function restoration after megaprosthetic reconstruction of the scapula and humerus after bone resections for oncologic and nononcologic reasons.

Extra-articular resection of shoulder joint for bone sarcomas: Oncologic and limb-salvage outcomes of 32 cases compared with shoulder disarticulation and forequarter amputation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify the overall survival (OS), surgical complications, survival of reconstruction, and functional outcome of patients who underwent extra-articular resection of the shoulder joint for primary bone sarcomas. The OS and local recurrence rates in patients who underwent an amputation were also evaluated for comparison.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients treated between 1988 and 2017 were studied. The tumours were located in the humerus in 22 (69%) and scapula in 10 patients (31%). The resection types were Malawer type IV in 6 (19%), type V in 21 (66%), and type VI in 5 patients (15%). Reconstruction was performed with endoprosthesis in 23 patients (72%) while excision arthroplasty with the suspension of the humerus to the clavicle was performed in 9 patients (28%). Surgical margins were wide in 16, marginal in 8, intralesional in 3, and not available in 5 patients. During the study period, 40 patients underwent a forequarter amputation and 11 patients underwent a shoulder disarticulation.

RESULTS

The 5-year OS for patients who underwent extra-articular resection of the shoulder joint was 42% which was not statistically different compared with that of patients who underwent amputation (5-year OS = 30%; P = .091). The 5-year survival of the reconstruction was 94%, similar for endoprosthesis and excision arthroplasty. Local recurrence and complications developed in 6 (19%) and 10 patients (31%), respectively. Failures of the reconstruction requiring revision surgery occurred in two patients (6%). Limb salvage was achieved in 30 patients (94%). The median Musculoskeletal Tumour Society functional score was 61% (interquartile range, 57%-70%) and was similar in the endoprosthesis and excision arthroplasty group.

CONCLUSIONS

Extra-articular resection of the shoulder joint for bone sarcomas is an effective limb-salvage method. However, local recurrence remains a principal concern.

Reconstruction techniques after proximal humerus tumour resection

Reconstruction of the proximal humerus after tumour resection is a surgical challenge. The goal consists not only in reconstructing the resected bone segment, but also in restoring a stable and mobile shoulder. The choice of the technique depends on the status of the soft-tissues at the end of the resection. The preoperative work-up must determine the oncological goals of the resection and identify the structures that can be spared. When deltoid muscle function is preserved, a reverse prosthesis offers the best stability and mobility outcomes. The objective of this work is to describe the indications and techniques used in the various available reconstruction methods. Shoulder mobilities are restored using some of these methods and lost with others. Emphasis is put on the reverse shoulder prosthesis, with a description of its variants (standard prosthesis, cement sleeve, allograft-prosthesis composite, and massive prosthesis) and a discussion of the management of its early complications. When performing reverse shoulder arthroplasty, glenoid implant preparation and positioning are crucial to achieve stability, and humeral length restoration will govern soft-tissue tension. Latissimus dorsi tendon transfer is required to restore active external rotation if the posterior rotator cuff tendons have been removed. Allograft-anatomic prosthesis composites, osteo-cartilaginous allografts, arthrodesis, and spacer prostheses are proposed for patients in whom the local conditions preclude implantation of a reverse shoulder prosthesis.