ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2018
What Is the Adverse Event Profile After Prophylactic Treatment of Femoral Shaft or Distal Femur Metastases?
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response rate specific to bone metastasis of various cancers for immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Pooled it
- Importance of Metastatic Lesion Location and Subject-Specificity in the Determination of Femoral Fracture Risk.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Outcomes of distal femoral replacement versus internal fixation for metastatic bone diseases of the distal femur.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Modification to Mirels scoring system location component improves fracture prediction for metastatic disease of the proximal femur.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Clinical efficacy of customized modular prosthesis in the treatment of femoral shaft metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Prophylactic surgical treatment using CT-based rigidity analysisAnnals of joint · 2022Article
- A pituitary cup biopsy is more accurate than reamings for histological diagnosis of intramedullary lesions during nailing of impending and pathologic fractures: a retrospective matched cohort analysis.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Current Overview of Treatment for Metastatic Bone Disease.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Review
- Bone Metastatic Breast Cancer: Advances in Cell Signaling and Autophagy Related Mechanisms.Cancers · 2021Review
- Complications after intramedullary nail fixation of pathological versus non-pathological femoral shaft fractures: a retrospective cohort study in 233 patients.Patient safety in surgery · 2021Article
- Is Delayed Time to Surgery Associated with Increased Short-term Complications in Patients with Pathologic Hip Fractures?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Article
- CORR Insights®: Is There an Association Between Prophylactic Femur Stabilization and Survival in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Article
- A Case of Lower Extremity Weakness with Foot Drop Following Intramedullary Nailing of a Pathologic Femoral Fracture.Cureus · 2020Article
- CORR Insights®: What Is the Adverse Event Profile After Prophylactic Treatment of Femoral Shaft or Distal Femur Metastases?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProphylactic surgical treatment of the femur is commonly offered to patients with metastatic disease who have a high risk of impending pathologic fracture. Prophylactic fixation is associated with improved functional outcomes in appropriate patients selected based on established criteria, but the perioperative complication profile has received little attention. Given the substantial comorbidity in this population, it is important to characterize surgical risks for surgeons and patients to improve treatment decisions. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the incidence of postoperative adverse events after prophylactic surgical stabilization of metastatic lesions of the femoral shaft or distal femur? (2) How does this complication profile compare with stabilization of pathologic fractures adjusted for differences in patient demographics and comorbidity?
methodsWe performed a retrospective study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. We identified patients undergoing prophylactic treatment of the femoral shaft or distal femur by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Patients undergoing treatment of a pathologic fracture were identified by CPT code for femur fracture fixation as well as an International Classification of Diseases code indicating neoplasm or pathologic fracture. We tracked adverse events, operative time, blood transfusion, hospital length of stay, and discharge to a facility within 30 days postoperatively. There were 332 patients included in the prophylactic treatment group and 288 patients in the pathologic fracture group. Patients in the prophylactic treatment group presented with greater body mass index (BMI), whereas the pathologic fracture group presented with a greater incidence of disseminated cancer. The odds of experiencing adverse events were initially compared between the two groups using bivariate logistic regression and then using multivariate regression controlling for age, sex, BMI, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class and disseminated cancer causing marked physiological compromise per NSQIP guidelines.
resultsWith multivariate analysis controlling for age, sex, BMI, and ASA class, patients with pathologic fracture were more likely to experience any adverse event (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-2.29; p = 0.036), major adverse events (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.01-2.55; p = 0.043), death (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.07-3.38; p = 0.030), blood transfusion (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.08-2.27; p = 0.017), and hospital stay ≥ 9 days (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.05-2.19; p = 0.028) compared with patients undergoing prophylactic treatment. However, when additionally controlling for disseminated cancer, the only difference was that patients with pathologic fractures were more likely to receive a blood transfusion than were patients undergoing prophylactic fixation (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.12-2.36; p = 0.011).
conclusionsAfter controlling for differences in patient characteristics, prophylactic treatment of femoral metastases was associated with a decreased likelihood of blood transfusion and no differences in terms of the frequency of other adverse events. In the context of prior studies supporting the mechanical and functional outcomes of prophylactic treatment, the findings of this cohort suggest that the current guidelines have achieved a reasonable balance of morbidity in patients with femoral lesions and further support the current role of prophylactic treatment of impending femur fractures in appropriately selected patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.