1. bookVolume 4 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2544-8978
First Published
30 May 2018
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Surgical management of bone metastasis located in the proximal femur-review of literature

Published Online: 14 May 2022
Volume & Issue: Volume 4 (2021) - Issue 2 (December 2021)
Page range: 71 - 77
Accepted: 16 Feb 2022
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2544-8978
First Published
30 May 2018
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Neoplasms are the second leading cause of death worldwide. The increase in diagnostic possibilities and development of new treatments has led to an increase in life expectancy among cancer patients.

The proximal region of the femur is a favorite site for bone metastases, these lesions being accompanied by increased mortality and morbidity.

The methods of treatment for metastatic bone disease can be surgical or non-surgical.

Bone metastases and pathological bone fractures in the proximal femur are most commonly located in the intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric region. Patients with bone metastases at this level most often require osteosynthesis with a centromedullary nail, but also plates and screws or dynamic hip screw can be used.

Bone metastases located in the femoral neck or femoral head can be treated surgically by hemiarthroplasty (HA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA). Both HA and THA have been shown to be successful surgeries in patients with bone metastases.

In patients with multiple bone metastases located in the head or neck of the femur and trochanteric region, but with increased life expectancy, resection and reconstruction using endoprostheses is a viable solution.

Given the complexity of oncological pathologies, the therapeutic decision in the case of a patient with secondary bone determinations must be established by a multidisciplinary team comprising the oncologist, orthopedic surgeon, pathologist, anesthetist, and radiotherapist.

Surgical treatment of symptomatic bone metastases that cause pain and functional impotence with limited patient mobility increases survival and quality of life regardless of the type of surgery and the implant chosen.

Keywords

1. National Center for Health Statistics. Leading causes of death, 1900–1998. 2000. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/lead1900_98.pdf. Search in Google Scholar

2. Forsberg JA, Wedin R, Boland PJ, Healey JH. Can We Estimate Short- and Intermediate-term Survival in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Metastatic Bone Disease? Clin OrthopRelat Res. 2017 Apr; 475(4):1252-1261. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5187-3.10.1007/s11999-016-5187-3 Search in Google Scholar

3. Gobbini E, Ezzalfani M, Dieras V, Bachelot T, Brain E, Debled M, Jacot W, Mouret-Reynier MA, Goncalves A, Dalenc F, Patsouris A, Ferrero JM, Levy C, Lorgis V, Vanlemmens L, Lefeuvre-Plesse C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Petit T, Uwer L, Jouannaud C, Leheurteur M, Lacroix-Triki M, Cleaud AL, Robain M, Courtinard C, Cailliot C, Perol D, Delaloge S. Time trends of overall survival among metastatic breast cancer patients in the real-life ESME cohort. Eur J Cancer. 2018 Jun; 96:17-24. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.03.015.10.1016/j.ejca.2018.03.015 Search in Google Scholar

4. Kyriakopoulos CE, Chen YH, Carducci MA, Liu G, Jarrard DF, Hahn NM, Shevrin DH, Dreicer R, Hussain M, Eisenberger M, Kohli M, Plimack ER, Vogelzang NJ, Picus J, Cooney MM, Garcia JA, DiPaola RS, Sweeney CJ. Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Analysis of the Randomized Phase III E3805 CHAARTED Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2018 Apr 10; 36(11):1080-1087. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.3657.10.1200/JCO.2017.75.3657 Search in Google Scholar

5. Hage WD, Aboulafia AJ, Aboulafia DM. Incidence, location, and diagnostic evaluation of metastatic bone disease. Orthop Clin North Am. 2000 Oct; 31(4):515-28,vii. doi: 10.1016/s0030-5898(05)70171-1.10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70171-1 Search in Google Scholar

6. Coleman RE. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Oct 15; 12(20 Pt 2):6243s-6249s. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0931.10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-093117062708 Search in Google Scholar

7. Rades D, Schild SE, Abrahm JL. Treatment of painful bone metastases. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2010; 7,220-229. Search in Google Scholar

8. Saravana-Bawan S, David E, Sahgal A, Chow E. Palliation of bone metastases-exploring options beyond radiotherapy. Ann Palliat Med. 2019 Apr; 8(2):168-177. doi: 10.21037/apm.2018.12.04.10.21037/apm.2018.12.0430691279 Search in Google Scholar

9. Tanaka A, Katagiri H, Murata H, Wasa J, Miyagi M, Honda Y, Takahashi M. Surgery for femoral metastases. Bone Joint J. 2020 Mar; 102-B(3):285-292. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B3.BJJ-2019-0976.R1.10.1302/0301-620X.102B3.BJJ-2019-0976.R132114815 Search in Google Scholar

10. Howard EL, Shepherd KL, Cribb G, Cool P. The validity of the Mirels score for predicting impending pathological fractures of the lower limb. Bone Joint J. 2018 Aug; 100-B(8):1100-1105. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B8.BJJ-2018-0300.R1.10.1302/0301-620X.100B8.BJJ-2018-0300.R130062934 Search in Google Scholar

11. Philipp TC, Mikula JD, Doung YC, Gundle KR. Is There an Association Between Prophylactic Femur Stabilization and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Mar; 478(3):540-546. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000803.10.1097/CORR.0000000000000803714509132168065 Search in Google Scholar

12. Bongers MER, Groot OQ, Thio Q, Bramer JAM, Verlaan JJ, Newman ET, Raskin KA, Lozano-Calderon SA, Schwab JH. Prospective study for establishing minimal clinically important differences in patients with surgery for lower extremity metastases. Acta Oncol. 2021; 60:714-720.10.1080/0284186X.2021.189033333630699 Search in Google Scholar

13. Miller BJ, Carmody Soni EE, Gibbs CP, Scarborough MT. Intramedullary nails for long bone metastases: Why do they fail? Orthopedics. 2011, Apr 11; 34(4). doi: 10.3928/01477447-20110228-12.10.3928/01477447-20110228-1221469628 Search in Google Scholar

14. Goodman MA, Weiss KR. Surgical approach to metastatic bone disease. Operat. Tech. Orthop. 24; 85-90.10.1053/j.oto.2014.02.009 Search in Google Scholar

15. Meynard P, Seguineau A, Laumonerie P, Fabre T, Foltran D, Niglis L, Descamps J, Bouthors C, Lebaron M, Szymanski C, Sailhan F, Bonnevialle P. members of the SoFCOT. Surgical management of proximal femoral metastasis: Fixation or hip replacement? A 309 case series. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020 Oct; 106(6):1013-1023. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2020.05.007.10.1016/j.otsr.2020.05.00732778439 Search in Google Scholar

16. Harvey N, Ahlmann ER, Allison DC, Wang L, Menendez LR. Endoprostheses last longer than intramedullary devices in proximal femur metastases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012 Mar; 470(3):684-91. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-2038-0.10.1007/s11999-011-2038-0327018221879409 Search in Google Scholar

17. Sørensen MS, Horstmann PF, Hindsø K, Petersen MM. Use of endoprostheses for proximal femur metastases results in a rapid rehabilitation and low risk of implant failure. A prospective population-based study. J Bone Oncol. 2019 Oct 22; 19:100264. doi: 10.1016/j.jbo.2019.100264.10.1016/j.jbo.2019.100264691185831871883 Search in Google Scholar

18. Willeumier JJ, van de Sande MAJ, van der Wal RJP, Dijkstra PDS. Trends in the surgical treatment of pathological fractures of the long bones: based on a questionnaire among members of the Dutch Orthopaedic Society and the European Musculo-Skeletal Oncology Society (EMSOS). Bone Joint J. 2018 Oct; 100-B(10):1392-1398. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B10.BJJ-2018-0239.R1.10.1302/0301-620X.100B10.BJJ-2018-0239.R130295518 Search in Google Scholar

19. Yu Z, Xiong Y, Shi R, Min L, Zhang W, Liu H, Fang X, Tu C, Duan H. Surgical management of metastatic lesions of the proximal femur with pathological fractures using intramedullary nailing or endoprosthetic replacement. Mol Clin Oncol. 2018 Jan; 8(1):107-114. doi: 10.3892/mco.2017.1503.10.3892/mco.2017.1503577279329399352 Search in Google Scholar

20. Gusho CA, Clayton B, Mehta N, Colman MW, Gitelis S, Blank AT. Survival and outcomes of modular endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur for primary and non-primary bone tumors: Single institutional results. J Orthop. 2021 May 7; 25:145-150. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.05.008.10.1016/j.jor.2021.05.008813463234025058 Search in Google Scholar

21. Janssen SJ, Kortlever JT, Ready JE, Raskin KA, Ferrone ML, Hornicek FJ, Lozano-Calderon SA, Schwab JH. Complications After Surgical Management of Proximal Femoral Metastasis: A Retrospective Study of 417 Patients. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016 Jul; 24(7):483-94. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00043.10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-0004327227983 Search in Google Scholar

22. Angelini A, Trovarelli G, Berizzi A, Pala E, Breda A, Maraldi M, Ruggieri P. Treatment of pathologic fractures of the proximal femur. Injury. 2018 Nov; 49 Suppl 3:S77-S83. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.09.044.10.1016/j.injury.2018.09.04430415673 Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo