Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Treatment for long bone metastases based on a systematic literature review

  • Expert's Opinion • KNEE - FRACTURES
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To provide treatment guidelines for patients with long bone metastatic disease based on a systematic review of the literature and to propose an algorithm to guide orthopedic surgeons in decision-making for these patients.

Materials and methods

We performed a computerized literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus for studies on patients with long bone metastases. We used the key words “long bones”, “metastasis” and “treatment” for published studies that evaluated any treatment for long bone metastases. The articles found were then studied to determine the accuracy of surgical treatments for long bone metastases in every anatomic location, regardless of cancer type, stage and grade of the oncologic disease. Guidelines inferred from this literature review were collected, and an algorithm was proposed.

Results

There was no clear evidence to support excision of a long bone metastatic lesion at the same surgical setting with internal fixation or prosthetic reconstruction. However, en bloc resection of an isolated bone metastasis may have a beneficial effect on survival. The life expectancy of the patients should be considered for any surgical treatment. Internal fixation preferably with reconstruction nails is indicated for meta-diaphyseal lesions; their rate of mechanical failure and complications ranges from 2 to 22 %. Prosthetic reconstruction is indicated for extensive lytic lesions or pathologic fractures in a meta-epiphyseal locations; their rate of mechanical failure and complications ranges from 3.7 to 35 %. Most of the internal fixation-related complications occur more than 1 year after treatment, in contrast to prosthetic reconstruction-related complications that may occur earlier.

Conclusions

Intramedullary nail fixation or prosthetic reconstruction should be chosen on the basis of the location of the lesion, the extent of bone destruction and the stability of the construct to outlast the expected life of the patient. Implant-related complication is similar but may occur earlier with prosthetic reconstructions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Enisa Shevroja, Jean-Yves Reginster, … Nicholas C. Harvey

References

  1. Cheung FH (2014) The practicing orthopedic surgeon’s guide to managing long bone metastases. Orthop Clin North Am 45:109–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber KL, Randall RL, Grossman S, Parvizi J (2006) Management of lower-extremity bone metastasis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88(Suppl 4):11–19

    Google Scholar 

  3. Coleman RE (2006) Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res 12(20 Pt 2):6243s–6249s

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schulman KL, Kohles J (2007) Economic burden of metastatic bone disease in the US. Cancer 109:2334–2342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Forsberg JA, Eberhardt J, Boland PJ, Wedin R, Healey JH (2011) Estimating survival in patients with operable skeletal metastases: an application of a bayesian belief network. PLoS One 6:e19956

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Ratasvuori M, Wedin R, Hansen BH, Keller J, Trovik C, Zaikova O et al (2014) Prognostic role of en-bloc resection and late onset of bone metastasis in patients with bone-seeking carcinomas of the kidney, breast, lung, and prostate: SSG study on 672 operated skeletal metastases. J Surg Oncol 110:360–365

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Harvey N, Ahlmann ER, Allison DC, Wang L, Menendez LR (2012) Endoprostheses last longer than intramedullary devices in proximal femur metastases. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:684–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wedin R, Bauer HCF (2005) Surgical treatment of skeletal metastatic lesions of the proximal femur: endoprosthesis or reconstruction nail? J Bone Jt Surg Br 87:1653–1657

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ward WG, Holsenbeck S, Dorey FJ, Spang J, Howe D (2003) Metastatic disease of the femur: surgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 415(Suppl):S230–S244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hunt KJ, Gollogly S, Randall RL (2006) Surgical fixation of pathologic fractures: an evaluation of evolving treatment methods. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 63(3–4):77–82

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Doorn R, Stapert JW (2000) Treatment of impending and actual pathological femoral fractures with the long Gamma nail in The Netherlands. Eur J Surg Acta Chir 166:247–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ruggieri P, Mavrogenis AF, Casadei R, Errani C, Angelini A, Calabrò T, Pala E, Mercuri M (2010) Protocol of surgical treatment of long bone pathological fractures. Injury 41(11):1161–1167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Facchini G, Di Tullio P, Battaglia M, Bartalena T, Tetta C, Errani C, Mavrogenis AF, Rossi G (2016) Palliative embolization for metastases of the spine. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 26(3):247–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rossi G, Mavrogenis AF, Casadei R, Bianchi G, Romagnoli C, Rimondi E, Ruggieri P (2013) Embolisation of bone metastases from renal cancer. Radiol Med 118(2):291–302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nathan SS, Healey JH, Mellano D, Hoang B, Lewis I, Morris CD, Athanasian EA, Boland PJ (2005) Survival in patients operated on for pathologic fracture: implications for end-of-life orthopedic care. J Clin Oncol 23(25):6072–6082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mirels H (1989) Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 249:256–264

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fottner A, Szalantzy M, Wirthmann L, Stähler M, Baur-Melnyk A, Jansson V et al (2010) Bone metastases from renal cell carcinoma: patient survival after surgical treatment. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11:145

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Lin PP, Mirza AN, Lewis VO, Cannon CP, Tu S-M, Tannir NM et al (2007) Patient survival after surgery for osseous metastases from renal cell carcinoma. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89:1794–1801

    Google Scholar 

  19. Evenski A, Ramasunder S, Fox W, Mounasamy V, Temple HT (2012) Treatment and survival of osseous renal cell carcinoma metastases. J Surg Oncol 106:850–855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ruggieri P, Mavrogenis AF, Angelini A, Mercuri M (2011) Metastases of the pelvis: does resection improve survival? Orthopedics 34(7):e236–e244

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Steensma M, Boland PJ, Morris CD, Athanasian E, Healey JH (2012) Endoprosthetic treatment is more durable for pathologic proximal femur fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:920–926

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Van der Linden YM, Dijkstra PDS, Kroon HM, Lok JJ, Noordijk EM, Leer JWH et al (2004) Comparative analysis of risk factors for pathological fracture with femoral metastases. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86:566–573

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cannon CP, Mirza AN, Lin PP, Lewis VO, Yasko AW (2008) Proximal femoral endoprosthesis for the treatment of metastatic. Orthopedics 31:361

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Chandrasekar CR, Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Tillman RM, Abudu A, Buckley L (2009) Modular endoprosthetic replacement for tumours of the proximal femur. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91:108–112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Selek H, Başarir K, Yildiz Y, Sağlik Y (2008) Cemented endoprosthetic replacement for metastatic bone disease in the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 23:112–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Park DH, Jaiswal PK, Al-Hakim W, Aston WJS, Pollock RC, Skinner JA et al (2007) The use of massive endoprostheses for the treatment of bone metastases. Sarcoma 2007:62151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Nilsson J, Gustafson P (2008) Surgery for metastatic lesions of the femur: good outcome after 245 operations in 216 patients. Injury 39(4):404–410

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wedin R, Hansen BH, Laitinen M, Trovik C, Zaikova O, Bergh P, Kalén A, Schwarz-Lausten G, Vult von Steyern F, Walloe A, Keller J, Weiss RJ (2012) Complications and survival after surgical treatment of 214 metastatic lesions of the humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(8):1049–1055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Scotti C, Camnasio F, Peretti GM, Fontana F, Fraschini G (2008) Modular prostheses in the treatment of proximal humerus metastases: review of 40 cases. J Orthop Traumatol 9(1):5–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Miller BJ, Soni EE, Gibbs CP, Scarborough MT (2011) Intramedullary nails for long bone metastases: why do they fail? Orthopedics 34(4):274

    Google Scholar 

  31. Potter BK, Chow VE, Adams SC, Letson GD, Temple HT (2009) Endoprosthetic proximal femur replacement: metastatic versus primary tumors. Surg Oncol 18(4):343–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Weiss RJ, Ekström W, Hansen BH, Keller J, Laitinen M, Trovik C, Zaikova O, Wedin R (2013) Pathological subtrochanteric fractures in 194 patients: a comparison of outcome after surgical treatment of pathological and non-pathological fractures. J Surg Oncol 107(5):498–504

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Finstein JL, King JJ, Fox EJ, Ogilvie CM, Lackman RD (2007) Bipolar proximal femoral replacement prostheses for musculoskeletal neoplasms. Clin Orthop Relat Res 459:66–75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sarahrudi K, Greitbauer M, Platzer P, Hausmann JT, Heinz T, Vécsei V (2009) Surgical treatment of metastatic fractures of the femur: a retrospective analysis of 142 patients. J Trauma 66(4):1158–1163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zacherl M, Gruber G, Glehr M, Ofner-Kopeinig P, Radl R, Greitbauer M, Vecsei V, Windhager R (2011) Surgery for pathological proximal femoral fractures, excluding femoral head and neck fractures: resection vs. stabilisation. Int Orthop 35(10):1537–1543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Manoso MW, Frassica DA, Lietman ES, Frassica FJ (2007) Proximal femoral replacement for metastatic bone disease. Orthopedics 30(5):384–388

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Alvi HM, Damron TA (2013) Prophylactic stabilization for bone metastases, myeloma, or lymphoma: do we need to protect the entire bone? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(3):706–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Mavrogenis AF, Pala E, Romagnoli C, Romantini M, Calabro T, Ruggieri P (2012) Survival analysis of patients with femoral metastases. J Surg Oncol 105(2):135–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Willeumier JJ, van der Linden YM, van de Sande MAJ, Dijkstra PDS (2016) Treatment of pathological fractures of the long bones. EFORT Open Rev 1:136–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tomita K, Kawahara N, Kobayashi T, Yoshida A, Murakami H, Akamaru T (2001) Surgical strategy for spinal metastases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(3):298–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H, Oda H, Oshima M, Ryu J (2005) A revised scoring system for preoperative evaluation of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(19):2186–2191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bauer HC, Wedin R (1995) Survival after surgery for spinal and extremity metastases. Prognostication in 241 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 66(2):143–146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rades D, Fehlauer F, Schulte R, Veninga T, Stalpers LJ, Basic H, Bajrovic A, Hoskin PJ, Tribius S, Wildfang I, Rudat V, Engenhart-Cabilic R, Karstens JH, Alberti W, Dunst J, Schild SE (2006) Prognostic factors for local control and survival after radiotherapy of metastatic spinal cord compression. J Clin Oncol 24(21):3388–3393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. van der Linden YM, Dijkstra SP, Vonk EJ, Marijnen CA, Leer JW, Dutch Bone Metastasis Study Group (2005) Prediction of survival in patients with metastases in the spinal column: results based on a randomized trial of radiotherapy. Cancer 103(2):320–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Mizumoto M, Harada H, Asakura H, Hashimoto T, Furutani K, Hashii H, Takagi T, Katagiri H, Takahashi M, Nishimura T (2008) Prognostic factors and a scoring system for survival after radiotherapy for metastases to the spinal column: a review of 544 patients at Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital. Cancer 113(10):2816–2822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Lipton A, Fizazi K, Stopeck AT, Henry DH, Brown JE, Yardley DA, Richardson GE, Siena S, Maroto P, Clemens M, Bilynskyy B, Charu V, Beuzeboc P, Rader M, Viniegra M, Saad F, Ke C, Braun A, Jun S (2012) Superiority of denosumab to zoledronic acid for prevention of skeletal-related events: a combined analysis of 3 pivotal, randomised, phase 3 trials. Eur J Cancer 48(16):3082–3092

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Katagiri H, Okada R, Takagi T, Takahashi M, Murata H, Harada H, Nishimura T, Asakura H, Ogawa H (2014) New prognostic factors and scoring system for patients with skeletal metastasis. Cancer Med 3(5):1359–1367

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Cristina Ghinelli, medical illustrator, for the design of the figures for this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas F. Mavrogenis.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Errani, C., Mavrogenis, A.F., Cevolani, L. et al. Treatment for long bone metastases based on a systematic literature review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 27, 205–211 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-016-1857-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-016-1857-9

Keywords

Navigation