Intercalary prosthetic replacement is a reliable solution for metastatic humeral shaft fractures: retrospective, observational study of a single center series

Durability of intercalary endoprosthesis for humeral reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

The humerus is a common site of metastases and primary tumors. For some patients with a segmental defect and/or diaphyseal cortical destruction a cemented intercalary device may provide a more reliable construct, however data on their use is limited.

METHODS

We reviewed 43 (28 male and 15 female) patients treated with an intercalary humeral spacer at a single tertiary referral center between 1989 and 2022. Humeral lesions were most commonly secondary to metastatic disease (n = 29, 68%), with 25 (58%) patients presenting with a pathologic fracture. Mean age and body mass index were 66 years and 27.9 kg/m2 . First generation taper joint device were used in 22 patients and second-generation lap device in 21 patients.

RESULTS

Following reconstruction the 2-year overall survival was 30%. Mechanical complications occurred in 11 patients, most commonly aseptic loosening (n = 6, 14%). With death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of mechanical failure was 28% at 2-years postoperative. Following the procedure, mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores was 70% and mean shoulder elevation was 87°.

CONCLUSION

Reconstruction of the humeral diaphysis with an intercalary endoprosthesis provides restoration of function of the upper extremity, however, is associated with one in four patients having mechanical failure.

Intramedullary Nail vs. Plate Fixation for Pathological Humeral Shaft Fracture: An Updated Narrative Review and Meta-Analysis of Surgery-Related Factors

(1) Background: Pathological humeral shaft fracture (PHSF) is a frequently observed clinical manifestation in the later stages of tumor metastasis. Surgical interventions are typically recommended to alleviate pain and restore functionality. Intramedullary nail fixation (INF) or plate fixation (PF) is currently recommended for the treatment of PHSF. However, there is still no standard for optimal surgical treatment. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes of INF with PF for PHSF treatment. (2) Methods: We conducted searches in databases, such as Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed, for studies published prior to May 2023. In total, nine studies with 485 patients were reviewed. (3) Results: There were no significant differences noted in the incidence of fixation failure, local recurrence, wound complication or overall complication. However, the INF group demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of postoperative radial nerve palsy than the PF group (OR, 5.246; 95% CI, 1.548-17.774; p = 0.008). A subgroup analysis indicated that there were no statistically significant differences in fixation failure or local recurrence among subgroups categorized by the design of intramedullary nail. (4) Conclusions: Considering the short life expectancy of end-stage patients, the choice of surgical method depends on the patient's individual condition, fracture and lesion patterns, the surgeon's experience, and comprehensive discussion between the surgeon and patient.

Long bone shaft metastasis: a comparative study between cement filling and intercalary prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Metastatic bone lesions in the extremities can cause severe pain and pathological fractures, significantly affecting patients' quality of life. Timely intervention and effective management of long bone metastases can positively influence patient outcomes, including survival rates and subsequent treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and associated complications of two surgical reconstruction techniques and propose a more effective limb reconstruction approach for long bone metastases.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 28 patients with complete clinical data who underwent a surgical procedure for long bone metastases of the extremities in our department between January 2017 and June 2022. The patients were divided into two groups based on their surgical methods. In group 1, the affected bones were curetted and filled with cement, then secured with plates or intramedullary nails. In group 2, the affected bone segments were completely removed and replaced with custom intercalary prostheses. Various factors, including general patient information, surgical details, surgical effectiveness, and common complications, were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in general patient information between the two groups, including age, gender, surgical site, and primary tumor type. The operative times were 115.37 min for group 1 and 108.90 min for group 2, respectively (p > 0.05). However, intraoperative blood loss differed significantly between the groups, with 769 ml in group 1 and 521 ml in group 2 (p < 0.05). The postoperative MSTS scores were 91% for group 1 and 92% for group 2 (p > 0.05). Postoperative complications included two cases of internal fixation failure and three cases of tumor recurrence in group 1, resulting in a 33% incidence rate, while group 2 experienced a 15% incidence rate with two cases of internal fixation failure.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that both surgical techniques are effective for the treatment of long bone metastases of the extremities. However, the custom intercalary prostheses technique in group 2 showed a lower incidence of complications and less intraoperative blood loss. Therefore, it may be a more effective limb reconstruction approach for long bone metastases. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings.

Are Vascularized Fibula Autografts a Long-lasting Reconstruction After Intercalary Resection of the Humerus for Primary Bone Tumors?

BACKGROUND

A vascularized fibula graft (VFG) is the vascular autograft most frequently used to restore large segmental long bone defects, particularly in the upper limb. Because the use of a vascularized fibula involves an operation in an uninvolved extremity with potential morbidity, it is important to document that this type of reconstruction is successful in restoring function to the humerus. However, the long-term results of VFG after intercalary resection of the humeral diaphysis for bone tumors are still unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What was the complication rate of reconstruction? (2) What was the functional result after surgical treatment, as assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score, and Constant score? (3) What was the survivorship of these grafts free from revision and graft removal at 5, 10, and 15 years?

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2021, 127 patients were treated at our institution with en bloc resection for a primary malignant or an aggressive benign bone tumor of the humerus; we excluded patients treated with extra-articular resection or amputation. Of those, 14% (18 of 127) were treated with intercalary resection of the humeral diaphysis for primary bone tumors and reconstruction with VFG, with or without a bulk allograft, and were analyzed in this retrospective study. Generally, our indications for reconstruction with VFG are intercalary resection of the humerus for primary malignant or aggressive benign bone tumors in patients with long life expectancy and high functional demands, in whom adequate bone stock of the proximal and distal epiphysis can be preserved. In 13 patients, VFG was used alone, whereas in five patients, a massive allograft was used. Our policy was to use VFG combined with a massive allograft in patients undergoing juxta-articular joint-sparing resections in which proximal osteotomy was performed close to the anatomic neck of the humerus to obtain more stable fixation and better tendinous reattachment of the rotator cuff and deltoid. All 18 patients who were treated with a VFG were available for follow-up at a minimum of 2 years (median follow-up 176 months, range 26 to 275 months), and although three have not been seen in the past 5 years and are not known to have died, they had 172, 163, and 236 months of follow-up, and were included. The median age at surgery was 25 years (range 2 to 63 years), the median humeral resection length was 15 cm (range 8 to 21 cm), and the median fibular length was 16 cm (range 12 to 23 cm). Complications and functional scores were ascertained by chart review that was performed by an individual not involved in patient care. Functional results were assessed with the MSTS score (range 0 to 30), the ASES score (range 0 to 100), and the Constant score (range 0% to 100%). Survivorship was estimated using a Kaplan-Meier survivorship estimator, which was suitable because there were few deaths in this series.

RESULTS

Seven patients underwent a revision procedure (one radial nerve transient palsy because of screw impingement, four nonunions in three patients with one humeral head avascular necrosis, treatment for screw-related pain in one patient, and two VFG fractures), and one patient underwent VFG removal. Donor site complications were observed in four patients (one ankle valgus deformity and three claw toes-the first toe in two patients and the other toes in the third). At the final clinical control, at a median follow-up of 176 months (range 26 to 275 months), the median MSTS score was 30 of 30 (range 28 to 30), the median ASES score was 98.3 (range 93 to 100), and the median Constant score was 93.5% (range 79% to 100%). Revision-free survival was 71% (95% CI 53% to 96%) at 5 years and 57% (95% CI 37% to 88%) at 10 and 15 years; VFG removal-free survival was 94% (95% CI 83% to 100%) at 5, 10, and 15 years.

CONCLUSION

VFG appears to be an effective reconstructive option after humeral intercalary resection for primary bone tumors. These are complex procedures and should be performed by an experienced team of surgeons who recognize that complications may occur frequently in the first years after the procedure. The frequency of mechanical complications observed in the first 5 years postoperatively may be lessened by using long spanning-plate fixation, and if successful, this reconstruction provides a long-term, durable reconstruction with excellent functional results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

What Is the Prosthetic Survival After Resection and Intercalary Endoprosthetic Reconstruction for Diaphyseal Bone Metastases of the Humerus and Femur?

BACKGROUND

Large metastatic lesions of the diaphysis can cause considerable pain and result in difficult surgical challenges. Resection and cemented intercalary endoprosthetic reconstruction offer one solution to the problem, but it is an extensive operation that might not be tolerated well by a debilitated patient. The risk of aseptic loosening and revision after intercalary endoprosthetic replacement has varied in previous reports, which have not examined the risk of revision in the context of patient survival.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) In a small case series from one institution, what is the survivorship of patients after cemented intercalary endoprosthetic replacement for diaphyseal metastasis, and what is the cumulative incidence of revision for any reason? (2) What are the complications associated with cemented intercalary reconstruction? (3) What is the functional outcome after the procedure as assessed by the MSTS93 score?

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 19 patients with diaphyseal long bone metastases who were treated with resection and cemented intercalary endoprosthetic reconstruction by five participating surgeons at one referral center from 2006 to 2017. There were 11 men and eight women with a median age of 59 years (range 46 to 80 years). The minimum follow-up required for this series was 12 months; however, patients who reached an endpoint (death, radiographic loosening, or implant revision) before that time were included. One of these 19 patients was lost to follow-up but was not known to have died. The median follow-up was 24 months (range 0 to 116 months). Eight of the 19 patients presented with pathologic fractures. Ten of 19 lesions involved the femur, and nine of 19 were in the humerus. The most common pathologic finding was renal cell carcinoma (in 10 of 19). Survival estimates of the patients were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A competing risks estimator was used to evaluate implant survival, using death of the patient as the competing risk. We also estimated the cumulative incidence of aseptic loosening in a competing risk analysis. Radiographs were analyzed for radiolucency at the bone-cement-implant interfaces, fracture, integrity of the cement mantle, and component position stability. Complications were assessed using record review that was performed by an individual who was not involved in the initial care of the patients. Functional outcomes were assessed using the MSTS93 scoring system.

RESULTS

Patient survivorship was 68% (95% CI 50% to 93%) at 1 year, 53% (95% CI 34% to 81%) at 2 years, and 14% (95% CI 4% to 49%) at 5 years; the median patient survival time after reconstruction was 25 months (range 0 to 116 months). In the competing risk analysis, using death as the competing risk, the cumulative incidence of implant revision was 11% (95% CI 2% to 29%) at 1 year and 16% (95% CI 4% to 36%) at 5 years after surgery; however, the cumulative incidence of aseptic loosening (with death as a competing risk) was 22% (95% CI 6% to 43%) at 1 year and 33% (95% CI 13% to 55%) at 5 years after surgery. Other complications included one patient who died postoperatively of cardiac arrest, one patient with delayed wound healing, two patients with bone recurrence, and one patient who experienced local soft tissue recurrence that was excised without implant revision. Total MSTS93 scores improved from a mean of 12.6 ± 8.1 (42% ± 27%) preoperatively to 21.5 ± 5.0 (72% ± 17%) at 3 months postoperatively (p < 0.001) and 21.6 ± 8.5 (72% ± 28%) at 2 years postoperatively (p = 0.98; 3 months versus 2 years).

CONCLUSION

Resection of diaphyseal metastases with intercalary reconstruction can provide stability and short-term improvement in function for patients with advanced metastatic disease and extensive cortical destruction. Aseptic loosening is a concern, particularly in the humerus; however, the competing risk analysis suggests the procedure is adequate for most patients, because many in this series died of disease without undergoing revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study .

Outcomes of Intercalary Endoprostheses as a Treatment for Metastases in the Femoral and Humeral Diaphysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implant survival, functional score and complications of intercalary endoprostheses implanted for metastatic involvement of the femoral and humeral diaphysis.

METHODS

The selected group covered patients with bone metastasis who were surgically treated with an intercalary endoprosthesis between 2012 and 2021. The functional outcome was evaluated with the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system, and complications were evaluated by using the failure classification for prosthetics designed by Henderson.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 29.8 months. In our group of 25 patients with 27 intercalary endoprostheses (18 femurs, 9 humeri), there were 7 implant-related complications (25.9%), which were more common on the humerus (4 cases, 44.4%) than on the femur (3 cases, 16.7%). Only type II failure-aseptic loosening (5 cases, 18.5%)-and type III failure-structural failure (2 cases, 7.4%)-occurred. There was a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening of the endoprosthesis in the humerus compared with that in the femur (odds ratio 13.79, 95% confidence interval 1.22-151.05, p = 0.0297). The overall cumulative implant survival was 92% 1 year after surgery and 72% 5 years after surgery. The average MSTS score was 82%. The MSTS score was significantly lower (p = 0.008) in the humerus (75.9%) than in the femur (84.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The resection of bone metastases and replacement with intercalary endoprosthesis has excellent immediate functional results with an acceptable level of complications in prognostically favourable patients.

Surgical management of renal cancer metastasis in the humerus: novel use of a trabecular metal spacer

Humeral metastases from renal cell carcinoma are not uncommon. Current surgical practice centres around adequate tumour resection, but often at the expense of functional outcome. The use of trabecular metal (TM) implants is well described in spine and joint surgery. However, their use as a reconstruction device in osseous tumour surgery has yet to be reported. We present our experience in using a TM vertebral body replacement device (VBR) in treating a patient with painful bilateral diaphyseal humeral metastases. Resection of the tumour resulted in defects which the TM-VBR was able to fill. The defect was then bridged with a locking plate and cables. At 2-year clinical and radiographic review, bony integration and a return to pain free, near-normal function was achieved.