Dataset Information

Computer-Navigated Bone Cutting in the Resection of a Pelvic Bone Tumor and Reconstruction with a Massive Bone Allograft.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

We present here a surgical technique using a navigation system and an oscillating saw for the resection of a pelvic bone tumor combined with an allograft reconstruction.

Step 1 preoperative planning

The surgeon and radiologist together delineate the tumor on each magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) slice; then the surgeon defines target planes for tumor resection and transfers them to the allograft.

Step 2 patient positioning and surgical exposure

With the patient in the lateral decubitus position, combine ilioinguinal with iliocrural and obturator surgical approaches to expose the ilium.

Step 3 navigated tumor resection

Perform the osteotomies using the navigation system to guide the saw blade, following predefined target planes; perform a biopsy.

Step 4 navigated allograft cutting

Perform the osteotomies using the navigating saw, following the same target planes as used for the tumor resection.

Step 5 pelvic reconstruction

Fix the graft and cement a femoral stem in place; then reinsert all detached tendons and elevated muscles.

Results & preop/postop images

Editor's note: This technique is based on preliminary work that has not been presented in a peer-reviewed case series publication.

What to watch for

IndicationsContraindicationsPitfalls & Challenges.

SUBMITTER: Docquier PL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8343975 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jul-Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Computer-Navigated Bone Cutting in the Resection of a Pelvic Bone Tumor and Reconstruction with a Massive Bone Allograft.

Docquier Pierre-Louis PL Cartiaux Olivier O Paul Laurent L Delloye Christian C Banse Xavier X

JBJS essential surgical techniques 20110701 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>We present here a surgical technique using a navigation system and an oscillating saw for the resection of a pelvic bone tumor combined with an allograft reconstruction.<h4>Step 1 preoperative planning</h4>The surgeon and radiologist together delineate the tumor on each magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) slice; then the surgeon defines target planes for tumor resection and transfers them to the allograft.<h4>Step 2 patient positioning and surgical exposure</h4>With the patient ...[more]

PMID: 34377587

Similar Datasets

Project description:Bone tumor resections for limb salvage have become standard treatment. Recently, computer-assisted navigation has been introduced to improve the accuracy of joint arthroplasty and possible tumor resection surgery; however, like with any new technology, its benefits and limitations need to be characterized for surgeons to make informed decisions about whether to use it.We wanted to (1) assess the technical problems associated with computer-assisted navigation; (2) assess the accuracy of the registration technique; (3) define the time required to perform a navigated resection in orthopedic oncology; and (4) the frequency of complications such as local recurrence, infection, nonunion, fracture, and articular collapse after tumor resection and bone reconstruction with allografts using intraoperative navigation assistance.We analyzed 69 consecutive patients with bone tumors of the extremities that were reconstructed with massive bone allografts using intraoperative navigation assistance with a minimum followup of 12 months (mean, 29 months; range, 12-43 months). All patients had their tumors reconstructed in three-dimensional format in a virtual platform and planning was performed to determine the osteotomy position according to oncology margins in a CT-MRI image fusion. Tumor resections and allograft reconstructions were performed using a computer navigation system according to the previously planned cuts. We analyzed intraoperative data such as technical problems related to the navigation procedure, registration technique error, length of time for the navigation procedure, and postoperative complications such as local recurrence, infection, nonunion, fracture, and articular collapse.In three patients (4%), the navigation was not carried out as a result of technical problems. Of the 66 cases in which navigation was performed, the mean registration error was 0.65 mm (range, 0.3-1.2 mm). The mean required time for navigation procedures, including bone resection and allograft reconstruction during surgery, was 35 minutes (range, 18-65 minutes). Complications that required a second surgical procedure were recorded for nine patients including one local recurrence, one infection, two fractures, one articular collapse, and four nonunions. In two of these nine patients, the allograft needed to be removed. At latest followup, three patients died of their original disease.The navigation procedure could not be performed for technical reasons in 4% of the series. The mean registration error was 0.65 mm in this series and the navigation procedure itself adds a mean of 35 minutes during surgery. The complications rate for this series was 14%. We found a nonunion rate of 6% in allograft reconstructions when we used a navigation system for the cuts.Level IV, case series. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:BackgroundAllograft reconstruction following the resection of malignant bone tumors is associated with high rates of complications and failures. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and current problems of allograft reconstruction techniques to optimize treatment strategies at our center.Materials and methodsThirty-eight cases (16 men and 22 women), who were diagnosed with malignant bone tumors and had undergone allograft reconstruction, were recruited. Allograft was fixed by intramedullary nail, single steel plate, double plate, and intramedullary nail combined plate in 2, 4, 17, and 15 cases, respectively. Allograft union, local recurrence, and complications were assessed with clinical and radiological tests. Tumor grade was assessed using the Enneking staging of malignant bone tumors. Functional prognosis was evaluated by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system.ResultsIntercalary and osteoarticular reconstructions were performed in 32 and 6 cases, respectively. Six patients underwent reoperation related to allograft complications, four patients had local recurrence, and three patients with allograft fracture underwent allograft removal. A total of eight host-donor junctions showed nonunion, including seven cases (18.4%) in diaphysis and one case (3.1%) in metaphysis (p < 0.01). Host rejection and secondary osteoarthritis occurred in nine and two cases, respectively. No deep infection and internal fixation device fracture occurred. The overall allograft survival rate was 81.6%. Postoperative MSTS score of patients with allograft survival was 26.8 ± 2.9, indicating a significant improvement as compared to their preoperative function.ConclusionsAllograft represents an excellent choice for intercalary bone defects after malignant bone tumor resection. Robust internal fixation protection across the whole length of the allograft is an important prerequisite for the survival of the allograft, while multidimensional osteotomy, intramedullary cement reinforcement, and pedicled muscle flap transfer can effectively improve the survival rate and healing rate of the allograft.

Project description:ObjectiveTo introduce a novel 3D-printed prosthetic composite for reconstruction of massive bone defects after resection for bone malignancy of lower extremities. The design concept, surgical technique, and the preliminary outcomes were elaborated.MethodsPatients with primary malignant tumors of lower extremities requiring tumor resection and reconstruction were recruited between Jun 2015 and Nov 2018. Patient-specific 3D-printed prostheses were designed according to preoperative imaging data. After tumor resection, reconstruction was performed with composites consisting of 3D- printed prosthesis, beta-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) bioceramics and/or vascularized fibula. All patients underwent regular follow-up postoperatively. The functional outcomes were assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score (MSTS). Oncological outcomes, imaging results, and complications were recorded and analyzed.ResultsTen cases averaging 12.90 years of age participated in this study. There were five femur and five tibia reconstructions. The mean follow-up period was 16.90 months. At last follow-up, all patients were alive without tumor recurrence. Average MSTS functional score was 80.33 ± 11.05%. All prostheses were intact and stable without failure or systemic breakage. No serious complications occurred after the operation. Postoperative X-ray, computed tomography (CT) and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) showed an ideal integration between the bone and the prosthetic composite. Moreover, vascularized fibula and implanted β-TCP bioceramics indicated relatively high metabolic activity in vivo.ConclusionsPatient-specific 3D-printed prostheses combined with β-TCP bioceramics and/or vascularized fibula provide an excellent option for reconstruction of massive bone defects after lower extremity malignant tumor extirpation. Short-term follow up showed promising clinical results in recovering lower limb function, promoting osseointegration and reducing complications.

Project description:PurposeResection of pelvic bone tumours and subsequent pelvic girdle reconstruction pose formidable challenges due to the intricate anatomy, weight-bearing demands, and significant defects. 3D-printed implants have improved pelvic girdle reconstruction by enabling precise resections with customized guides, offering tailored solutions for diverse bone defect morphology, and integrating porous surface structures to promote osseointegration. Our study aims to evaluate the long-term efficacy and feasibility of 3D-printed hemipelvic reconstruction following resection of malignant pelvic tumours.MethodsA retrospective review was conducted on 96 patients with primary pelvic malignancies who underwent pelvic girdle reconstruction using 3D-printed custom hemipelvic endoprostheses between January 2017 and May 2022. Follow-up duration was median 48.1 ± 17.9 months (range, 6 to 76 months). Demographic data, imaging examinations, surgical outcomes, and oncological evaluations were extracted and analyzed. The primary endpoints included oncological outcomes and functional status assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS-93) score. Secondary endpoints comprised surgical duration, intraoperative bleeding, pain control and complications.ResultsIn 96 patients, 70 patients (72.9%) remained disease-free, 15 (15.6%) had local recurrence, and 11 (11.4%) succumbed to metastatic disease. Postoperatively, function improved with MSTS-93 score increasing from 12.2 ± 2.0 to 23.8 ± 3.8. The mean operating time was 275.1 ± 94.0 min, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 1896.9 ± 801.1 ml. Pain was well-managed, resulting in substantial improvements in VAS score (5.3 ± 1.8 to 1.4 ± 1.1). Complications occurred in 13 patients (13.5%), including poor wound healing (6.3%), deep prosthesis infection (4.2%), hip dislocation (2.1%), screw fracture (1.0%), and interface loosening (1.0%). Additionally, all patients achieved precise implantation of customized prosthetics according to preoperative plans. T-SMART revealed excellent integration at the prosthesis-bone interface for all patients.ConclusionThe use of a 3D-printed custom hemipelvic endoprosthesis, characterized by anatomically designed contours and a porous biomimetic surface structure, offers a potential option for pelvic girdle reconstruction following internal hemipelvectomy in primary pelvic tumor treatment. Initial results demonstrate stable fixation and satisfactory mid-term functional and radiographic outcomes.

Dataset Information

Computer-Navigated Bone Cutting in the Resection of a Pelvic Bone Tumor and Reconstruction with a Massive Bone Allograft.

Introduction

Step 1 preoperative planning

Step 2 patient positioning and surgical exposure

Step 3 navigated tumor resection

Step 4 navigated allograft cutting

Step 5 pelvic reconstruction

Results & preop/postop images

What to watch for

Publications

Computer-Navigated Bone Cutting in the Resection of a Pelvic Bone Tumor and Reconstruction with a Massive Bone Allograft.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets