Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38513152›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2024

Intercalary Resection of the Tibia for Primary Bone Tumors: Are Vascularized Fibula Autografts With or Without Allografts a Durable Reconstruction?

Domenico Andrea Campanacci, Roberto Scanferla, Mariagrazia Marsico, Federico Scolari, Guido Scoccianti, Giovanni Beltrami, Luca Delcroix, Marco Innocenti, Rodolfo Capanna

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Domenico Andrea CampanacciDepartment of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Roberto ScanferlaDepartment of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Mariagrazia MarsicoDepartment of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Federico ScolariDepartment of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5490-672
Guido ScocciantiDepartment of Orthopaedic Oncology and Reconstructive Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0637-6896
Giovanni BeltramiDepartment of Paediatric Orthopaedics, Meyer University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Luca DelcroixDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Marco InnocentiDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy.
Rodolfo CapannaOrthopaedic Clinic, Cisanello University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi · ITIstituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITMeyer Children's Hospital · ITOspedale Cisanello · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReconstruction with vascularized fibula grafts (VFG) after intercalary resection of sarcoma may offer longevity by providing early graft-host union and fracture healing. The ability of the fibula to hypertrophy under mechanical stress, as well as vascularized bone in the area, may also be advantageous, given that soft tissues may be compromised because of resection, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy. VFG with a massive allograft combines the primary mechanical stability of the graft with the biological potential of the vascularized fibula; however, complications and the durability of this combined reconstruction are not well described. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What was the proportion of complications after reconstruction with VFG, with or without allografts? (2) What was the functional result after surgical treatment as assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score? (3) What was the survivorship of these grafts free from revision and graft removal?

methodsBetween 1988 and 2021, 219 patients were treated at our institution for a primary malignant or aggressive benign bone tumor of the tibia with en bloc resection. Of those, 54% (119 of 219) had proximal tibial tumors with epiphyseal involvement and were treated with either intra-articular resection and reconstruction with an osteoarticular allograft, allograft-prosthesis composite (APC), or modular prosthesis according to age, diagnosis, and preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy. Nine percent (20) of patients had distal tibial tumors that were treated with intra-articular resection and reconstruction with ankle arthrodesis using allogenic or autologous grafts, and 0.5% (1 patient) underwent total tibial resection for extensive tumoral involvement of the tibia and reconstruction with an APC. Thirty-six percent (79) of patients had a metadiaphyseal bone tumor of the tibia and were treated with intercalary joint-sparing resection. We routinely use reconstruction with VFG after intercalary tibial resection for primary malignant or aggressive benign bone tumors in patients with long life expectancy and high functional demands and in whom at least 1 cm of residual bone stock of the proximal or distal epiphysis can be preserved. By contrast, we routinely use intercalary massive allograft reconstruction in short resections or in patients with metastatic disease who do not have long life expectancy. We avoid VFG in patients with tibial bone metastasis, patients older than 70 years, or primary bone tumors in patients who may undergo postoperative radiotherapy; in these patients, we use alternative reconstructive methods such as intercalary prostheses, plate and cement, or intramedullary nailing with cement augmentation. According to the above-mentioned indications, 6% (5 of 79) of patients underwent massive allograft reconstruction because they were young and had intercalary resections shorter than 7 cm or had metastatic disease at diagnosis without long life expectancy, whereas 94% (74) of patients underwent VFG reconstruction. The median age at operation was 16 years (range 5 to 68 years). The diagnosis was high-grade osteosarcoma in 22 patients, Ewing sarcoma in 19, adamantinoma in 16, low-grade osteosarcoma in five, fibrosarcoma in three, malignant fibrous histiocytoma and Grade 2 chondrosarcoma in two, and malignant myoepitelioma, angiosarcoma of bone, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor of bone, squamous cell carcinoma secondary to chronic osteomyelitis, and desmoplastic fibroma in one patient each. Median follow-up was 12.3 years (range 2 to 35 years). The median tibial resection length was 15 cm (range 7 to 27 cm), and the median fibular resection length was 18 cm (range 10 to 29 cm). VFG was used with a massive allograft in 55 patients, alone in 12 patients, and combined with allogenic cortical bone struts in seven patients. We used VFG combined with a massive allograft in patients undergoing juxta-articular, joint-sparing resections that left less than 3 cm of residual epiphyseal bone, for intra-epiphyseal resections, or for long intercalary resections wherein the allograft can provide better mechanical stability. In these clinical situations, the combination of a VFG and massive allograft allows more stable fixation and better tendinous reattachment of the patellar tendon. VFG was used with cortical bone struts in distal tibia intercalary resections where the narrow diameter of the allograft did not allow concentric assembling with the fibula. Finally, VFG alone was often used after mid- or distal tibia intercalary resection in patients with critical soft tissue conditions because of previous surgery, in whom the combination with massive allograft would result in a bulkier reconstruction. We ascertained complications and MSTS scores by chart review, and survivorship free from revision and graft removal was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. In our study, however, the occurrence of death as a competing event was observed in a relatively low proportion of patients, and only occurred after the primary event of interest had already occurred. Considering the nature of our data, we did not consider death after the primary event of interest as a competing event.

resultsIn all, 49% (36 of 74) of patients experienced complications and underwent operative treatment. There were 45 complications in 36 patients. There was one instance of footdrop secondary to common peroneal nerve palsy, four wound problems, one acute vein thrombosis of the VFG pedicle and one necrosis of the skin island, two episodes of implant-related pain, 10 nonunions, six fractures, six deep infections, nine local recurrences, one Achilles tendon retraction, one varus deformity of the proximal tibia with postoperative tibial apophysis detachment, one knee osteoarthritis, and one hypometria. The median MSTS score was 30 (range 23 to 30); the MSTS score was assessed only in patients in whom the VFG was retained at the final clinical visit, although if we had considered those who had an amputation, the overall score would be lower. Revision-free survival of the reconstructions was 58% (95% confidence interval 47% to 70%) at 5 years, 52% (95% CI 41% to 65%) at 10 and 15 years, and 49% (95% CI 38% to 63%) at 20 and 30 years. Eight patients underwent VFG removal because of complications, with an overall reconstruction survival of 91% (95% CI 84% to 98%) at 5 years and 89% (95% CI 82% to 97%) at 10 to 30 years.

conclusionVFG, alone or combined with an allograft, could be considered in reconstructing a lower extremity after intercalary resections of the tibia for primary bone tumors, and it avoids the use of a large endoprosthesis. However, this procedure was associated with frequent, often severe complications during the first postoperative years and complication-free survival of 58% at 5 years. Nearly 10% of patients ultimately had an amputation. For patients whose reconstruction succeeded, the technique provides a durable reconstruction with good MSTS scores, and we believe it is useful for active patients with long life expectancy. Fractures, frequently observed in the first 5 years postoperatively, might be reduced using long-spanning plate fixation, and that appeared to be the case in our study. Nonbridging fixation can be an option in intraepiphyseal resection when a spanning plate cannot be used or in pediatric patients to enhance fibula hypertrophy and remodeling. We did not directly compare VFG with or without allografts to other reconstruction options, so the decision to use this approach should be made thoughtfully and only after considering the potential serious risks. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Identifiers

PMID38513152
PMCPMC11124688
OpenAlexW4393031674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.