Pasteurized Autograft-Prosthesis Composite Reconstruction May Not Be a Viable Primary Procedure for Large Skeletal Defects after Resection of Sarcoma

Periacetabular reconstruction following limb-salvage surgery for pelvic sarcomas

Limb-salvage surgery for pelvic sarcomas remains one of the most challenging surgical procedures for musculoskeletal oncologists. In the past several decades, various surgical techniques have been developed for periacetabular reconstruction following pelvic tumor resection. These methods include endoprosthetic reconstruction, allograft or autograft reconstruction, arthrodesis, and hip transposition. Each of these procedures has its own advantages and disadvantages, and there is no consensus or gold standard for periacetabular reconstruction. Consequently, this review provides an overview of the clinical outcomes for each of these reconstructive options following pelvic tumor resections. Overall, high complication rates are associated with the use of massive implants/grafts, and deep infection is generally the most common cause of reconstruction failure. Functional outcomes decline with the occurrence of severe complications. Further efforts to avoid complications using innovative techniques, such as antibiotic-laden devices, computer navigation, custom cutting jigs, and reduced use of implants/grafts, are crucial to improve outcomes, especially in patients at a high risk of complications.

What Are the Challenges and Complications of Sterilizing Autografts with Liquid Nitrogen for Malignant Bone Tumors? A Preliminary Report

BACKGROUND

Reconstruction of defects after resection of malignant bone tumors with liquid nitrogen-sterilized recycled autografts is an alternative to bone allografts and endoprostheses in resource-constrained environments. Most studies reporting favorable outcomes with liquid nitrogen-sterilized autografts for bone reconstruction are geographically restricted to a few countries, and the technical challenges of routinely using liquid nitrogen intraoperatively, especially when using the pedicle freezing technique, has not been documented.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What are the technical challenges of liquid nitrogen sterilization of bone tumors for inexperienced surgeons? (2) What are the complications associated with the procedure?

METHODS

Between May 2017 and October 2019, 88 patients underwent limb salvage procedures for malignant bone tumors of the extremities at our institution. An endoprosthesis was used for reconstruction of the defect following resection in 45% (40 of 88) of these patients, mostly in adults (median age 21 years; range 9 to 68). In the remaining 55% (48 of 88) of patients undergoing biological reconstruction, liquid nitrogen-sterilized autograft was used in 90% (43 of 48), extracorporeal irradiation-sterilized autograft was used in 4% (2 of 48) and allograft was used in 6% (3 of 48). Of the 43 patients receiving liquid nitrogen-sterilized autograft, 5% (2 of 43) were excluded due to loss to follow-up and the remaining 95% (41 of 43) were included for the analysis. Liquid nitrogen-sterilized autograft was the preferred method of reconstruction at our institution during the study period, unless the patient had an indication for prosthesis reconstruction; extracorporeal irradiation-sterilized autograft was used due to resource constraints with liquid nitrogen and allograft was used when patients insisted.All surgical procedures were performed by the same team of trained orthopaedic oncology surgeons. The medical records of the included 41 patients were retrieved using an institutional database search in this retrospective study, and all were used to ascertain technical challenges associated with the operations as well as early (within 3 weeks of the index procedure) and late complications (those occurring 3 weeks or more after surgery). The technical challenges were defined as follows: the quantity of liquid nitrogen to be used; arranging, storing and handling of liquid nitrogen in the operating room, type and size of the container to be used for sterilization, the positioning of the container during pedicle freezing, level of fibular osteotomy for pedicle freezing of tibia, soft tissue protection, limb rotation during pedicle freezing, managing tourniquet time, and any other intraoperative factors with the use of liquid nitrogen for sterilizing the autograft. As our experience with the technique gradually grew, the answers to the above-mentioned factors were determined. Considering the removal of autograft as the endpoint of interest, survival of the autograft was determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis.The median (range) patient age was 14 years (2 to 49), and 54% (22 of 41) were males. Osteosarcoma was the most common diagnosis (68%, [28 of 41]) followed by Ewing's sarcoma (20%, [8 of 41]). On presentation, 27% of patients (11 of 41) had radiological evidence of pulmonary metastasis. Tumors were seen frequently around the knee (39% [16 of 41] proximal tibia and 22% [9 of 41] distal femur). Before resection 85% (35 of 41) underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Sixty-six percent (27 of 41) underwent pedicle-freezing and the remaining 34% (14 of 41) underwent free-freezing of the tumor segment of the bone. The median (range) duration of surgery was 280 minutes (210 to 510). The patients were followed up for a median (range) duration of 21 months (5 to 30); two patients were lost to follow-up.

RESULTS

With gradual experience using liquid nitrogen-sterilization over time at our institution, we determined that the following factors helped us in performing liquid nitrogen-sterilization more efficiently. For every operation 15 L to 20 L of unsterilized liquid nitrogen was arranged, 1 or 2 days before the procedure, and stored in industrial-grade cryocylinders in the operating complex. During the procedure, the operating surgeons wore additional plastic aprons under the surgical gowns, surgical goggles, and rubber boots. The staff managing the liquid nitrogen in the operating room wore thermal protective gloves. For most of the pedicle freezing procedures, we used a cylindrical stainless-steel container that was 30 cm in height and 15 cm in diameter, with a narrow opening. The container was kept on a separate moveable cart that was placed next to the operating table at a slightly lower level, and it was wrapped in multiple cotton rolls, plastic sheets, surgical sheets, and a crepe bandage. For pedicle freezing of the tibia, we performed the fibular osteotomy at least 5 cm away from the planned surgical margin, roughly around the axis of rotation of the limb. The soft tissue at the base of the delivered bone segment was dissected for at least 5 cm beyond the planned surgical margin of bone, and was protected with multiple layers of cotton rolls, plastic drapes, a single roll of Esmarch and crepe bandage. The tumor segment was externally rotated during pedicle freezing for all anatomic sites (proximal tibia, distal tibia, proximal humerus, and proximal femur). The tourniquet was inflated just before pedicle freezing to prevent tumor dissemination and not before the initial incision in all pedicle freezing procedures.Thirty-nine percent of patients (16 of 41) experienced complications associated with the procedures, and 15% (6 of 41) underwent revision surgery. Early complications (occurring within 3 weeks of the index procedure) were skin necrosis in four of 16 patients, intraoperative fracture in one of 16, superficial infection in one of 16, and neurapraxia in one of 16 patients. Late complications (occurring 3 weeks or more after surgery) were resorption of the recycled bone in four of 16 patients, nonunion of the osteotomy site in two of 12, delayed union of the osteotomy site in one of 16, collapse of the recycled bone in one of 16, and local recurrence in 1 of 16 patients. Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from removal of autograft at 2 years after surgery was 92% (95% confidence interval 89 to 96).

CONCLUSION

Liquid nitrogen-sterilization is an alternative technique that requires some training and experience for the surgeon to become proficient in treating primary malignant bone tumors. Because it is widely available, it may be an option worth exploring in resource-constrained environments, where allografts and endoprostheses cannot be procured. The methods we developed to address the technical challenges will require more study and experience, but we believe these observations will aid others who may wish to use and evaluate liquid nitrogen sterilization of extremity bone sarcomas.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Does Reconstruction with Reimplantation of Sterilized Tumor Bone Provide Survival Benefit in Diaphyseal Osteosarcoma?

Does reimplantation of sterilized tumor bone for reconstruction provide outcome benefits in intercalary osteosarcoma based on the potential immunogenic effect of reimplanted sterilized tumor tissue? Of 720 cases of surgically treated high-grade osteosarcoma patients treated at our institute from 2006 to 2013, 61 had predominantly diaphyseal disease. All patients were nonmetastatic at presentation. Patient and tumor characteristics, treatment details, and local recurrence-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival were compared for 24 patients who had reconstruction with sterilized tumor bone reimplantation vs 37 who did not. Both the groups were well matched in terms of baseline characteristics. Means were compared with the t-test, proportions with the chi-square test, and survival with the log-rank test. The Kaplan‐Meier method was used to construct time to event curves. Cox proportional hazard regression modeling was employed for multivariate time to event analysis. Twenty-two had extracorporeal radiation and reimplantation (ECRT) with or without the vascularised fibula. Fifty-gray single dose was used in all cases. Two had pasteurization and reimplantation. Thirty seven had non-reimplantation reconstructions (including intercalary or osteoarticular endoprosthesis, pedicled bone grafts, rotation-plasty, and amputations). Five-year local recurrence-free survival was 85% for reimplantation and 97% for non-reimplantation groups (p=0.17). Five-year metastasis-free survival was 63% and 54%, respectively (p=0.44). Five-year overall survival was 70% and 58%, respectively (p=0.39). The data from this study did not demonstrate significantly better local recurrence-free, distant relapse-free, or overall survival benefit in the tumor bone reimplantation group.

Pedicle frozen autograft-prosthesis composite reconstructions for malignant bone tumors of the proximal femur

Background

Limb salvage surgery is becoming increasingly popular after tumor resection in the lower extremity. Biological reconstruction and use of megaprosthesis are main methods for malignant bone tumors of the proximal femur, which remain controversial due to short- and long-term complication in the proximal femur. Tumor-bearing bone treated by liquid nitrogen is one of biological reconstruction. This study aimed to evaluate the mid- and long-term functional outcomes and complications in patients treated with frozen autograft–prosthesis composite (FAPC) reconstructions in the proximal femur.

Methods

This retrospective study included 19 patients (10 women, 9 men) with malignant tumors of the proximal femur who underwent tumor-wide resection and FAPC reconstruction (mean age, 46 years; range, 9–77 years). The mean follow-up period of 69 months (range, 9–179 months). Functional outcomes, oncological outcome and complications were evaluated by Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score, clinical and radiological examinations.

Results

The overall survival rate was 68.4%, and the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional score was 26.4 points (88%). FAPC survival rates were 100 and 50% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Five of the 19 patients (26%) had complications: 2 required prosthesis removal and 2 developed a deep infection around acetabular. Wear of the acetabulum occurred in 2 cases, while disease recurrence was occurred in 1 case. There were no cases of greater trochanter avulsion, obvious absorption around frozen bone, prosthesis loosening or leg length discrepancy.

Conclusions

Due to without femoral osteotomy, this technique features satisfactory functional outcome and provide biomechanical stability that is comparable to those of other methods of biological reconstruction or megaprosthesis.

Megaprosthesis versus Allograft Prosthesis Composite for massive skeletal defects

Massive skeletal defects are encountered in the setting of tumors necessitating excision, failed total hip arthroplasty with periprosthetic bone loss, periprosthetic fracture, complex trauma, multiple failed osteosynthesis and infection. Reconstruction of the segmental defects poses a tremendous challenge to the orthopaedic surgeons. The goal of osseous reconstruction of these defects is to restore the bone length and function. Currently the most commonly employed methods for reconstruction are either a megaprosthesis or an Allograft Prosthesis Composite (APC). Megaprosthesis, initially created for the treatment in neoplastic pathologies are being used for the non-neoplastic pathologies as well. The longevity of these implants is an issue as majority of the patients receiving them are the survivors of oncologic issue or elderly population, both in which the life expectancy is limited. However, the early complications like instability, infection, prosthetic breakage and fixation failure have been extensively reported in several literatures. Moreover, the megaprostheses are non-biological options preventing secure fixation of the soft tissue around the implant. The Allograft Prosthesis Composites were introduced to overcome the complications of megaprosthesis. APC is made of a revision-type prosthesis cemented into the skeletal allograft to which the remaining soft tissue sleeve can be biologically fixed. APCs are preferred in young and low risk patients. Though the incidence of instability is relatively low with the composites as compared to the megaprosthesis, apart from infection, the newer complications pertaining to APCs are inevitable that includes non-union, allograft resorption, periprosthetic fracture and potential risk of disease transmission. The current review aims to give an overview on the treatment outcomes, complications and survival of both the megaprostheses and APCs at different anatomic sites in both the upper and lower limbs.