The effect of defect size and location on the fracture risk of proximal tibia, following tumor curettage and cementation: An in-silico investigation

Even though, proximal tibia is a common site of giant cell tumor and bone fractures, following tumor removal, nonetheless very little attention has been paid to affecting factors on the fracture risk. Here, nonlinear voxel-based finite element models based on computed tomography images were developed to predict bone fracture load with defects with different sizes, which were located in the medial, lateral, anterior, and posterior region of the proximal tibia. Critical defect size was identified using One-sample t-test to assess if the mean difference between the bone strength for a defect size was significantly different from the intact bone strength. Then, the defects larger than critical size were reconstructed with cement and the mechanics of the bone-cement interface (BCI) was investigated to find the regions prone to separation at BCI. A significant increase in fracture risk was observed for the defects larger than 20 mm, which were located in the medial, lateral and anterior regions, and defects larger than 25 mm for those located in the posterior region of the proximal tibia. Furthermore, it was found that the highest and lowest fracture risks were associated with defects located in the medial and posterior regions, respectively, highlighting the importance of selecting the initial location of a cortical window for tumor removal by the surgeon. The results of the BCI analysis showed that the location and size of the cement had a direct impact on the extent of damage and its distribution. Identification of critical regions susceptible to separation at BCI, can provide critical comments to surgeons in selecting the optimal cement augmentation technique, which may ultimately prevent unnecessary surgical intervention, such as using screws and pins.

Post-operative fracture risk assessment following tumor curettage in the distal femur: a hybrid in vitro and in silico biomechanical approach

The distal femur is the predominant site for benign bone tumours and a common site for fracture following tumour removal or cementation. However, the lack of conclusive assessment criterion for post-operative fracture risk and appropriate devices for cement augmentation are serious concerns. Hence, a validated biomechanical tool was developed to assess bone strength, depending on the size and location of artificially created tumorous defects in the distal femora. The mechanics of the bone–cement interface was investigated to determine the main causes of reconstruction failure. Based on quantitative-CT images, non-linear and heterogeneous finite element (FE) models of human cadaveric distal femora with simulated tumourous defects were created and validated using in vitro mechanical tests from 14 cadaveric samples. Statistical analyses demonstrated a strong linear relationship (R² = 0.95, slope = 1.12) with no significant difference between bone strengths predicted by in silico analyses and in vitro tests (P = 0.174). FE analyses showed little reduction in bone strength until the defect was 35% or more of epiphyseal volume, and reduction in bone strength was less pronounced for laterally located defects than medial side defects. Moreover, the proximal end of the cortical window and the most interior wall of the bone–cement interface were the most vulnerable sites for reconstruction failure.

Investigation on distal femoral strength and reconstruction failure following curettage and cementation: In-vitro tests with finite element analyses

Cement augmentation following benign bone tumor surgery, i.e. curettage and cementation, is recommended in patients at high risk of fracture. Nonetheless, identifying appropriate cases and devices for augmentation remains debatable. Our goal was to develop a validated biomechanical tool to: predict the post-surgery strength of a femoral bone, assess the precision and accuracy of the predicted strength, and discover the mechanisms of reconstruction failure, with the aim of finding a safe biomechanical fixation. Tumor surgery was mimicked in quantitative-CT (QCT) scanned cadaveric human distal femora, and subsequently tested in compression to measure bone strength (F_Exp). Finite element (FE) models considering bone material non-homogeneity and non-linearity were constructed to predict bone strength (F_FE). Analyses of contact, damage, and crack initiation at the bone-cement interface (BCI) were completed to investigate critical failure locations. Results of paired t-tests did not show a significant difference between F_Exp and F_FE (P > 0.05); linear regression analysis resulted in good correlation between F_Exp and F_FE (R² = 0.94). Evaluation of the models precision using linear regression analysis yielded R² = 0.89, with the slope = 1.08 and intercept = -324.16 N. FE analyses showed the initiation of damage and crack and a larger cement debonding area at the proximal end and most interior part of BCI, respectively. Therefore, we speculated that devices that reinforce critical failure locations offer the most biomechanical advantage. The QCT-based FE method proved to be a reliable tool to predict distal femoral strength, identify some causes of reconstruction failure, and assist in a safer selection of fixation devices to reduce post-operative fracture risk.

The Great Need of a Biomechanical-Based Approach for Surgical Methods of Giant Cell Tumor: A Critical Review

There are many unanswered questions about giant cell tumor (GCT) treatment and not enough attention is paid to the biomechanics of the current treatment methods. Treatment methods have not changed much, and the best method remains controversial to some degree, due to the lack of adequate clinical and biomechanical investigations. Biomechanical tests, including in vitro mechanical experiments combined with finite element analysis, are very helpful in assessing the efficiency of the surgical methods employed and in determining the optimal method of surgery. Tests can be tailored to meet a patient’s needs, while limiting postoperative complications. One of the complications, following tumor surgery, is the frequency of postoperative fractures. In order to prevent postoperative fractures, defect reconstruction is recommended. The reconstruction usually consists of defect infilling with bone cement, and in the case of large defects cement augmentation is employed. Whether cement augmentation is essential and offers enough mechanical strength and what is the best fixation device for cement augmentation are areas of debate. In this article, the biomechanical studies comparing different methods of tumor surgery and cement augmentation, highlighting the areas needing more attention to advance GCT treatment, are critically reviewed. Based on our review, we recommend a biomechanical criterion for the essence of defect reconstruction, which must include patient specific factors, in addition to the tumor geometrical properties.