No consensus on implant choice for oligometastatic disease of the femoral head and neck

Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease

Background/Objective

The hip is a common location for metastatic bone disease (MBD) and surgical intervention is often indicated to relieve pain and improve function. MBD of the hip is usually treated with hemiarthroplasty or with total hip arthroplasty if there are acetabular lesions. As treatment for metastatic disease evolves and patients may expect to live longer after diagnosis, further evaluation of the complications and functional outcomes associated with hip arthroplasty for MBD are necessary.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent hip arthroplasty for MBD at a single institution between 2007 and 2021. Outcomes included rates of reoperation, complications, and overall survival.

Results

Ninety-three cases in 91 patients were included. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) was performed in 52 cases (55.9%), hemiarthroplasty in 15 (16.1%), and complex arthroplasty, including proximal femur replacement or THA with complex acetabular reconstruction, was performed in 26 (28%). There were 11 reoperations in five patients and six dislocations. Median survival was 10.4 months and one-year overall survival was 53.3%. There was a significant increase in the proportion of patients who were able to ambulate independently (35.2% vs 17.6%; p=0.02) and a significant decrease in patients confined to a wheelchair (18.7% vs 3.3%; p=0.045) after surgery.

Conclusions

Hip arthroplasty for MBD leads to relatively low rates of complications and reoperations in this population known to have high postoperative morbidity and mortality. Hip arthroplasty provides the majority of MBD patients with a durable reconstruction that exceeds their lifespan and enables them to return to an acceptable level of function.

Cemented long versus standard femoral stem in proximal femoral metastasis: a noninferiority single-blinded quasi-randomized clinical trial

Background and purpose

Proximal femur is a common site for metastasis, it has a significant impact on patient’s quality of life, and traditional treatment aims at protecting as much as possible from the femur. However, recent studies have demonstrated increased rate of complications and questioned the need for long stem in this high-risk group. Our purpose is to determine whether standard-length femoral stem is noninferior to long femoral stem in the treatment of proximal femoral metastasis.

Patients and methods

Between 2019 and 2021, we prospectively included 24 patients with proximal femoral metastasis leading either to impending or pathological fractures (5 and 19 cases, respectively). We included patients with lesions due to metastasis, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma. Patients were quasi-randomized based on their order of presentation into two groups based on the femoral stem length, cemented standard (group 1) and long (group 2) femoral stem. Oncological complications, survival, stem complications, and functional outcomes were recorded and analyzed using SPSS 25.

Results

24 patients were included in the final analysis, 13 case in group 1 and 11 in group 2, and mean age 57.6 years. Mean follow-up duration was 10 months, and 11 patients died of the whole-study population with mean survival of (10.85 ± 2.23, 8.82 ± 3.6) months in group 1, 2, respectively. The complication rate was higher in the standard group; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance. No difference was found between study groups regarding functional outcomes, except for VAS at 6 months which was higher in standard group.

Conclusion

We believe that the ubiquitous use of long stem in the management of proximal femoral metastasis should be questioned considering the expected patient survival and low rate of complications associated with the use of standard stem.

Clinicaltrials.gov registration number

NCT04660591.

The Surgical Management of Proximal Femoral Metastases: A Narrative Review

The proximal femur is a common location for the development of bony metastatic disease. Metastatic bone disease in this location can cause debilitating pain, pathologic fractures, reduced quality of life, anemia or hypercalcemia. A thorough history, physical examination and preoperative investigations are required to ensure accurate diagnosis and prognosis. The goals of surgical management is to provide pain relief and return to function with a construct that provides stability to allow for immediate weightbearing. Current surgical treatment options include intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty and endoprosthetic reconstructions. Oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma must be given special consideration as tumor resection and reconstruction has survival benefit. Both tumor and patient characteristics must be taken into account before deciding on the appropriate surgical intervention.

Development of Distal Femoral Metastasis is Rare in Cases of Isolated Proximal Femoral Metastases

INTRODUCTION

In the setting of pathologic fractures or impending fractures of the femur, intramedullary nailing or hemiarthroplasty are the common surgical procedures indicated. Traditional teaching has stressed the importance of protecting the entire femur, and thus, it is common for these fractures to be treated with long nails or stems. Recent literature has begun to investigate whether this school of thought is valid and may challenge the perceived need for protection of the entire femur. The purpose of our study was to determine the incidence of ipsilateral distal femoral metastases after the treatment of proximal femoral metastases.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed that identified 66 patients who presented with completed or impending pathologic fractures of the proximal femur who then underwent either intramedullary nailing or hemiarthroplasty for surgical stabilization. Plain radiographs, in conjunction with CT, MRI, or positron emission tomography-CT when available, were used to determine whether there was disease progression and/or distal metastasis in the femur.

RESULTS

There was one patient (1.5%) in this series who developed distal femoral metastasis after hemiarthroplasty from metastatic breast carcinoma. There were three patients (4.54%) with local progression of the disease. No patient required further intervention, and there were no cases of hardware failure or periprosthetic fracture after prophylactic fixation.

DISCUSSION

Our findings show that there is an extremely low likelihood of developing distal femoral metastases when isolated proximal femoral metastases are present and thus protecting the entire femur may not be necessary in this clinical scenario.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, therapeutic study.

Outcomes of press-fit uncemented versus cemented hip arthroplasty in the oncologic patient

Background and objectives

Cemented hip arthroplasty is considered the standard of care for treating both osteoporotic femoral neck fractures and pathologic disease of the proximal femur due to the ability to achieve strong fixation in poor quality bone. There is minimal literature evaluating uncemented arthroplasty for pathologic disease of the proximal femur. This objective of this study is to compare outcomes of patients undergoing cemented and uncemented arthroplasty of the proximal femur for an oncologic indication.

Methods

Patients who underwent hip arthroplasty procedures in one health system for an oncologic indication were identified. Demographics, cancer history, operative history, and complications were collected retrospectively. Harris Hip Scores (HHS) and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scores (MSTS) were prospectively collected via telephone.

Results

41 patients met criteria for review. 18 underwent cemented and 23 underwent uncemented arthroplasty. There were no significant differences in age, demographics, complications, 30-day mortality, intraoperative blood loss, transfusion requirements, average HHS, or average MSTS.

Conclusion

No significant differences were found for patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for an oncologic indication regardless of whether or not the femoral component was cemented. Our results suggest that cemented and uncemented techniques are both safe and effective methods to be used at the oncologic surgeon's discretion.

Trends in the surgical treatment of pathological proximal femur fractures in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Large scale data on the treatment of pathologic proximal femur fractures (PPFFs) are lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in patient demographics, complication rates, and relative utilization rates of various techniques associated with PPFFs.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for PPFFs from 2009 to 2017. Patient demographics, 30-day complications, and utilization rates were recorded. Trends in these variables were determined over the study period.

RESULTS

Most patient demographics did not change during the study period. There were no trends toward decreasing rates of major complications (P = .82), reoperations (P = .65), non-home discharges (P = .17), readmissions (P = .07), or deaths (P = .75); transfusion rates significantly decreased (P < .001). Rates of hemiarthroplasty decreased (P = .03) and rates of intramedullary nailing increased (P = .001).

DISCUSSION

Despite advances in cancer therapeutics, the average PPFF patient has not significantly changed over the past decade. Similarly, most short-term outcomes after PPFF surgery have not improved, demonstrating a need for improved perioperative protocols. Finally, rates of IMN fixation are increasing while rates of HA are falling at NSQIP hospitals. Given that orthopedic oncologists favor endoprosthetic reconstruction in most cases, there may be a need for increased communication between orthopedic oncologists and other members of the orthopedic community treating PPFFs.