Aims. Hip reconstruction after resection of a periacetabular chondrosarcoma is complex and associated with a high rate of complications. Previous reports have compared no reconstruction with historical techniques that are no longer used. The aim of this study was to compare the results of tantalum acetabular reconstruction to both historical techniques and no reconstruction. Methods. We reviewed 66 patients (45 males and 21 females) with a mean age of 53 years (24 to 81) who had undergone acetabular resection for chondrosarcoma. A total of 36 patients (54%) underwent acetabular reconstruction, most commonly with a saddle prosthesis (n = 13; 36%) or a tantalum total hip arthroplasty (THA) (n = 10; 28%). Mean follow-up was nine years (SD 4). Results. There was no difference in the mean age (p = 0.63), sex (p = 0.110), tumour volume (p = 0.646), or type of resection carried out (p > 0.05) between patients with and without reconstruction. Of the original 66 patients, 61 (92%) were ambulant at final follow-up. There was no difference in the proportion of patients who could walk in the reconstruction and 'no reconstruction' groups (p = 0.649). There was no difference in the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score between patients who were reconstructed and those who were not (61% vs 56%; p = 0.378). Patients with a tantalum THA had a significantly (p = 0.015) higher mean MSTS score (78%) than those who were reconstructed with a saddle prosthesis (47%) or who had not been reconstructed (56%). Patients who had undergone reconstruction were more likely to have complications (81% vs 53%; p = 0.033). Conclusion. Reconstruction after resection of the acetabulum is technically demanding. In selected cases, reconstruction is of benefit, especially when reconstruction is by tantalum THA; however, the follow-up for these patients remains mid-term. When not feasible, patients with no reconstruction have an acceptable functional outcome.
To assess complications and failure mechanisms of osteoarticular
allograft reconstructions for primary bone tumours. We retrospectively evaluated 38 patients (28 men, 74%) who were
treated at our institution with osteoarticular allograft reconstruction
between 1989 and 2010. Median age was 19 years (interquartile range
14 to 32). Median follow-up was 19.5 years (95% confidence interval
(CI) 13.0 to 26.1) when 26 patients (68%) were alive. In addition, we
systematically searched the literature for clinical studies on osteoarticular
allografts, finding 31 studies suitable for analysis. Results of
papers that reported on one site exclusively were pooled for comparison.Aims
Patients and Methods
There is currently no consensus about the mean
volume of blood lost during spinal tumour surgery and surgery for metastatic
spinal disease. We conducted a systematic review of papers published
in the English language between 31 January 1992 and 31 January 2012.
Only papers that clearly presented blood loss data in spinal surgery
for metastatic disease were included. The random effects model was
used to obtain the pooled estimate of mean blood loss. We selected 18 papers, including six case series, ten retrospective
reviews and two prospective studies. Altogether, there were 760
patients who had undergone spinal tumour surgery and surgery for
metastatic spinal disease. The pooled estimate of peri-operative
blood loss was 2180 ml (95% confidence interval 1805 to 2554) with catastrophic
blood loss as high as 5000 ml, which is rare. Aside from two studies
that reported large amounts of mean blood loss (>
5500 ml), the
resulting funnel plot suggested an absence of publication bias.
This was confirmed by Egger’s test, which did not show any small-study
effects
(p = 0.119). However, there was strong evidence of heterogeneity
between studies (I2 = 90%; p <
0.001). Spinal surgery for metastatic disease is associated with significant
blood loss and the possibility of catastrophic blood loss. There
is a need to establish standardised methods of calculating and reporting
this blood loss. Analysis should include assessment by area of the
spine, primary pathology and nature of surgery so that the amount
of blood loss can be predicted. Consideration should be given to
autotransfusion in these patients. Cite this article: