Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and impact of tourniquet use in patients undergoing limb salvage surgery with endoprosthetic reconstruction for a tumour around the knee. Methods. We retrieved data from the Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumor Surgery (PARITY) trial; specifically, differences in baseline characteristics, surgical details, and postoperative functional outcomes between patients who had undergone surgery under tourniquet and those who had not. A linear regression model was created to evaluate the impact of tourniquet use on postoperative Toronto Extremity Salvage Scores (TESSs) while controlling for confounding variables. A negative-binomial regression model was constructed to explore predictors of postoperative length of stay (LOS). Results. Of the 604 patients enrolled in the PARITY trial, 421 had tumours around the knee joint, of whom 225 (53%) underwent surgery under tourniquet. The tourniquet group was younger (p = 0.014), more likely to undergo surgery for a tumour of the tibia, and had shorter operating times by a mean of 50 minutes (95% confidence interval 30 to 72; p < 0.001). The adjusted linear regression model found that the use of a tourniquet, a shorter operating time, and a higher baseline TESS independently predicted better function at both three- and six-month follow-up. The negative-binomial regression model showed that tourniquet use, shorter operating time, younger age, and intraoperative tranexamic acid administration independently predicted a shorter LOS in hospital. Conclusion. The results of this study show that in patients undergoing resection of a tumour around the knee and endoprosthetic reconstruction, the use of an intraoperative tourniquet is associated with a shorter operating time, a reduced length of stay in hospital, and a better early functional outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(10):1168–1173

Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological outcomes of an antiprotrusio acetabular cage (APC) when used in the surgical treatment of periacetabular bone metastases.

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: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:683–8.