1
|
Lozano-Calderon SA, Rijs Z, Groot OQ, Su MW, Werenski JO, Merchan N, Yeung CM, Sodhi A, Berner E, Oliveira V, Bianchi G, Staals E, Lana D, Donati D, Segal O, Marone S, Piana R, Meo SD, Pellegrino P, Ratto N, Zoccali C, Scorianz M, Tomai C, Scoccianti G, Campanacci DA, Andreani L, Franco SD, Boffano M, Pensado MP, Ruiz IB, Moreno EH, Ortiz-Cruz EJ, van de Sande M. Outcomes of Long Bones Treated With Carbon-Fiber Nails for Oncologic Indications: International Multi-institutional Study. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2024; 32:e134-e145. [PMID: 37824083 DOI: 10.5435/jaaos-d-22-01159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2022] [Accepted: 07/27/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intramedullary nail fixation is commonly used for prophylactic stabilization of impending and fixation of complete pathological fractures of the long bones. However, metallic artifacts complicate imaging evaluation for bone healing or tumor progression and postoperative radiation planning. Carbon-fiber implants have gained popularity as an alternative, given their radiolucency and superior axial bending. This study evaluates incidences of mechanical and nonmechanical complications. METHODS Adult patients (age 18 years and older) treated with carbon-fiber nails for impending/complete pathological long bone fractures secondary to metastases from 2013 to 2020 were analyzed for incidences and risk factors of mechanical and nonmechanical complications. Mechanical complications included aseptic screw loosening and structural failures of host bone and carbon-fiber implants. Deep infection and tumor progression were considered nonmechanical. Other complications/adverse events were also reported. RESULTS A total of 239 patients were included; 47% were male, and 53% were female, with a median age of 68 (IQR, 59 to 75) years. Most common secondary metastases were related to breast cancer (19%), lung cancer (19%), multiple myeloma (18%), and sarcoma (13%). In total, 17 of 30 patients with metastatic sarcoma received palliative intramedullary nail fixation for impending/complete pathological fractures, and 13 of 30 received prophylactic nail stabilization of bone radiated preoperatively to manage juxta-osseous soft-tissue sarcomas, where partial resection of the periosteum or bone was necessary for negative margin resection. 33 (14%) patients had complications. Mechanical failures included 4 (1.7%) structural host bone failures, 7 (2.9%) implant structural failures, and 1 (0.4%) aseptic loosening of distal locking screws. Nonmechanical failures included 8 (3.3%) peri-implant infections and 15 (6.3%) tumor progressions with implant contamination. The 90-day and 1-year mortalities were 28% (61/239) and 53% (53/102), respectively. The literature reported comparable failure and mortality rates with conventional titanium treatment. CONCLUSIONS Carbon-fiber implants might be an alternative for treating impending and sustained pathological fractures secondary to metastatic bone disease. The seemingly comparable complication profile warrants further cohort studies comparing carbon-fiber and titanium nail complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Santiago A Lozano-Calderon
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA (Lozano-Calderon, Groot, Werenski, Merchan, Yeung, Sodhi, and Berner), Leiden University Medical Center Leiden, The Netherlands (Rijs, Su, and van de Sande), Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto, Oporto University Hospital Center, Porto, Portugal (Oliveria), IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy (Bianchi, Staals, and Donati), Ospedale Maggiore Trauma Center, Bologna, Italy (Lana), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel (Segal), Centro Traumatologico Ortopedico, Turin, Italy (Marone, Piana, Meo, Pellegrino, and Ratto), Department of General Surgery, Plastic Surgery, and Orthopaedics, Policlinico Umberto I Hospital-Sapienza, Orthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, University of Rome, Rome, Italy (Zoccali). Orthopaedic Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy (Tomai, Scoccianti, and Campanacci), University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy (Andreani and Franco), Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid, Spain (Pensado, Ruiz, Moreno, and Ortiz-Cruz), Regina Margherita Children's Hospital Torino, TO, Italy (Boffano)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zijlstra H, Striano BM, Crawford AM, Groot OQ, Raje N, Tobert DG, Patel CG, Wolterbeek N, Delawi D, Kempen DHR, Verlaan JJ, Schwab JH. Neurologic Outcomes After Radiation Therapy for Severe Spinal Cord Compression in Multiple Myeloma: A Study of 162 Patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2023; 105:1261-1269. [PMID: 37262176 DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.22.01335] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Bone destruction is the most frequent disease-defining clinical feature of multiple myeloma (MM), resulting in skeletal-related events such as back pain, pathological fractures, or neurologic compromise including epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC). Up to 24% of patients with MM will be affected by ESCC. Radiation therapy has been proven to be highly effective in pain relief in patients with MM. However, a critical knowledge gap remains with regard to neurologic outcomes in patients with high-grade ESCC treated with radiation. METHODS We retrospectively included 162 patients with MM and high-grade ESCC (grade 2 or 3) who underwent radiation therapy of the spine between January 2010 and July 2021. The primary outcome was the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score after 12 to 24 months, or the last known ASIA score if the patient had had a repeat treatment or died. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with poor neurologic outcomes after radiation, defined as neurologic deterioration or lack of improvement. RESULTS After radiation therapy, 34 patients (21%) had no improvement in their impaired neurologic function and 27 (17%) deteriorated neurologically. Thirty-six patients (22%) underwent either surgery or repeat irradiation after the initial radiation therapy. There were 100 patients who were neurologically intact at baseline (ASIA score of E), of whom 16 (16%) had neurologic deterioration. Four variables were independently associated with poor neurologic outcomes: baseline ASIA (odds ratio [OR] = 6.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.70 to 17.38; p < 0.001), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (OR = 6.19; 95% CI = 1.49 to 29.49; p = 0.015), number of levels affected by ESCC (OR = 4.02; 95% CI = 1.19 to 14.18; p = 0.026), and receiving steroids prior to radiation (OR = 4.42; 95% CI = 1.41 to 16.10; p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS Our study showed that 38% of patients deteriorated or did not improve neurologically after radiation therapy for high-grade ESCC. The results highlight the need for multidisciplinary input and efforts in the treatment of high-grade ESCC in patients with MM. Future studies will help to improve patient selection for specific and standardized treatments and to clearly delineate which patients are likely to benefit from radiation therapy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Zijlstra
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - B M Striano
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - A M Crawford
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - O Q Groot
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - N Raje
- Department of Hematology/Oncology-Center for Multiple Myeloma, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - D G Tobert
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - C G Patel
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - N Wolterbeek
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - D Delawi
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - D H R Kempen
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J J Verlaan
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J H Schwab
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|