What Are the Complications, Reconstruction Survival, and Functional Outcomes of Modular Prosthesis and Allograft-prosthesis Composite for Proximal Femur Reconstruction in Children With Primary Bone Tumors?

BACKGROUND: Proximal femur reconstruction after bone tumor resection in children is a demanding surgery for orthopaedic oncologists because of the small bone size and possible limb-length discrepancy at the end of skeletal growth owing to physis loss. The most commonly used reconstruction types used for the proximal femur are modular prostheses and allograft-prosthesis composites. To our knowledge, there are no previous studies comparing the outcomes after modular prosthesis and allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction of the proximal femur in children with primary bone tumors. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What was the cumulative incidence of reoperation for any reason after allograft-prosthesis composite and modular prosthesis reconstructions of the proximal femur in children with primary bone tumors? (2) What was the cumulative incidence of reconstruction removal or revision arthroplasty in those two treatment groups? (3) What complications occurred in those two treatment groups that were managed without further surgery or with surgery without reconstruction removal? METHODS: Between 2000 and 2021, 54 children with primary bone tumors underwent resection and reconstruction of the proximal femur at a single institution. During that time, allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction was used in very young children, in whom we prioritize bone stock preservation for future surgeries, and children with good response to chemotherapy, while modular prosthesis reconstruction was used in older children and children with metastatic disease at presentation and poor response to chemotherapy. We excluded three children in whom limb salvage was not possible and 11 children who underwent either reconstruction with free vascularized fibular graft and massive bone allograft (n = 3), an expandable prosthesis (n = 3), a massive bone allograft reconstruction (n = 2), a rotationplasty (n = 1), standard (nonmodular) prosthesis (n = 1), or revision of preexisting reconstruction (n = 1). Further, we excluded two children who were not treated surgically, three children with no medical or imaging records, and three children with no follow-up. All the remaining 32 children with reconstruction of the proximal femur (12 children treated with modular prosthesis and 20 children treated with allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction) were accounted for at a minimum follow-up time of 2 years. Children in the allograft-prosthesis group were younger at the time of diagnosis than those in the modular prosthesis group (median 8 years [range 1 to 16 years] versus 15 years [range 9 to 17 years]; p = 0.001]), and the follow-up in the allograft-prosthesis composite group was longer (median 5 years [range 1 to 23 years] versus 3 years [range 1 to 15 years]; p = 0.37). Reconstruction with hemiarthroplasty was performed in 19 of 20 children in the allograft-prosthesis composite group and in 9 of 12 children in the modular prosthesis group. A bipolar head was used in 16 of 19 children, and a femoral ceramic head without acetabular cup was used in 3 of 19 children in the allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction group. All 9 children in the modular prosthesis group were reconstructed with a bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Reconstruction with total arthroplasty was performed in one child in the allograft-prosthesis composite group and in three children in the modular prosthesis group. For both groups, we calculated the cumulative incidence of reoperation for any reason and the cumulative incidence of reconstruction removal or revision arthroplasty; we also reported qualitative descriptions of serious complications treated nonoperatively in both groups. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of any reoperation at 10 years did not differ between the groups with the numbers available (36% [95% confidence interval 15% to 58%] in the allograft-prosthesis composite group versus 28% [95% CI 5% to 58%] in the modular proximal femoral replacement group). The cumulative incidence of reconstruction removal or revision arthroplasty at 10 years likewise did not differ between the groups with the numbers available (10% [95% CI 2% to 28%] versus 12% [95% CI 0% to 45%], respectively). In the allograft-prosthesis composite group (20 children), hip instability (n = 3), nonunion (n = 2), fracture of the greater trochanter (n = 1), screw loosening (n = 1), limb-length discrepancy (n = 1), and coxalgia due to acetabular wear (n = 1) were treated surgically without reconstruction removal. Complications treated without surgery included resorption of the allograft at the trochanteric region (n = 4), fracture of the greater trochanter (n = 4), limb-length discrepancy (n = 6), and coxalgia due to acetabular wear (n = 2). In the modular prosthesis group (12 children), hip instability (n = 1), coxalgia due to acetabular wear (n = 1), and limb-length discrepancy (n = 1) were treated surgically without reconstruction removal. Complications treated without surgery included hip instability (n = 2), stress shielding (n = 6), infection (n = 1), sciatic nerve palsy (n = 1), and limb-length discrepancy (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Although the two groups of children were not directly comparable due to differences in age and clinical characteristics, both modular prosthesis and allograft-prosthesis composite reconstructions of the proximal femur after bone tumor resection appear to be reasonable options with similar revision-free survival and complications. Therefore, the type of reconstruction following proximal resection in children with bone sarcoma should be chosen taking into consideration factors such as patient age, bone size, implant availability, technical expertise, and the surgeon's preference. Although children treated with expandable prostheses were not included in this study, such prostheses may be useful in bridging the surgical defect while correcting residual limb-length discrepancies even though they face limitations such as small intramedullary diameter, short residual bone segments, as well as stress shielding, loosening, and breakage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Xenografting Human Musculoskeletal Sarcomas in Mice, Chick Embryo, and Zebrafish: How to Boost Translational Research.

Musculoskeletal sarcomas pose major challenges to researchers and clinicians due to their rarity and heterogeneity. Xenografting human cells or tumor fragments in rodents is a mainstay for the generation of cancer models and for the preclinical trial of novel drugs. Lately, though, technical, intrinsic and ethical concerns together with stricter regulations have significantly curbed the employment of murine patient-derived xenografts (mPDX). In alternatives to murine PDXs, researchers have focused on embryonal systems such as chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) and zebrafish embryos. These systems are time- and cost-effective hosts for tumor fragments and near-patient cells. The CAM of the chick embryo represents a unique vascularized environment to host xenografts with high engraftment rates, allowing for ease of visualization and molecular detection of metastatic cells. Thanks to the transparency of the larvae, zebrafish allow for the tracking of tumor development and metastatization, enabling high-throughput drug screening. This review will focus on xenograft models of musculoskeletal sarcomas to highlight the intrinsic and technically distinctive features of the different hosts, and how they can be exploited to elucidate biological mechanisms beneath the different phases of the tumor's natural history and in drug development. Ultimately, the review suggests the combination of different models as an advantageous approach to boost basic and translational research.

Extraskeletal Ewing Sarcoma of the Extremities and Trunk: A Retrospective Analysis of a Mono-Institutional Series.

INTRODUCTION: Extraskeletal Ewing sarcoma (EEwS) is a rare malignant tumor, and current international recommendations indicate systemic and local treatment like bone Ewing sarcoma (BEwS); to the best of our knowledge, very few studies tried to explore the clinical and genetic characteristics of this tumor, and the most appropriate treatment strategy remains uncertain. METHODS: We reviewed 35 EEwS cases enrolled at Rizzoli Orthopedic Institute in Bologna, Italy, between 1988-2022. We performed RNA sequencing in 18 Ewing sarcoma cases, including 12 BEwSs and 6 EEwSs. We analyzed overall survival (OS), local relapse-free survival (LRFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) and the risk factors associated to survival. RESULTS: Unsupervised hierarchical clustering showed no differences in the transcriptional profile between EEwS and BEwS. Five-year OS was 67% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47-80), 5-year LRFS was 61% (95% CI: 43-75), and 5-year MFS was 55% (95% CI: 38-70). Recurrent tumors, larger than 8 cm, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum value resulted to be negative prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: The finding/detection of a genetic profile that is indistinguishable between EEwS and BEwS confirms the view that the two subgroups belong to the same tumor entity and supports the use of a single therapeutic approach for Ewing sarcoma, regardless of the site of origin. Statistical evaluation showed that size bigger than 8 cm, elevated LDH, and recurrent tumors had a worse prognosis, suggesting a risk-stratification method for identifying patients for specific therapy treatment. However, larger, multicenter, prospective trials are called for to validate our findings.

Does Patellar Height Influence Range of Motion and Anterior Knee Pain after Distal Femur Endoprosthesis Reconstruction?

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the patellar height changes after distal femur (DF) endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) and its impact on anterior knee pain (AKP) and range of motion (ROM). Methods: A retrospective review of three institutions' databases was performed. The patellar height was determined using the modified Insall-Salvati ratio (MIS), the Blackburne-Peel (BP) and the Caton-Deschamps (CD) indexes. Data regarding AKP and ROM were collected. Results: A total of 199 patients were included. The mean age at presentation was 37.9 ± 23.1 years. The mean one-year follow-up MIS, BP and CD were 1.52 (sd: 0.41), 0.82 (sd: 0.33) and 0.93 (sd: 0.33). Patellar height decreased significantly compared to the pre-operative values according to all three scores (p < 0.001). AKP was reported by 34 (17.1%) patients at 1 year follow-up. Patients with patella baja (MIS < 1.2) or pseudo patella baja (CD < 0.6) had a higher incidence of AKP (p = 0.037 and p = 0.024, respectively). The mean flexion ROM was 91°, with a direct correlation with patellar height (MIS p = 0.020, BP p = 0.036 and CD p = 0.036). Conclusion: The restoration of the native position of the joint line in DF EPR is important to maintain optimal patellofemoral biomechanics. Despite surgeons' tendency toward a reduction in patellar height with respect to pre-operative values, an increase in patellar height might help to achieve better knee flexion and reduce AKP.

Extended distal femur resection: Megaprosthesis with telescopic bone allograft augmentation versus total femur prosthesis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Oncological distal femur resections can leave a proximal femur too short to host a stem. Reconstructive techniques are then challenging. The purpose of the study is to compare implant survival, complication rate and MSTS of two different options. METHODS: We retrospectively divided 33 patients with primary bone tumours of distal femur in Group 1 (16 patients reconstructed with knee megaprosthesis with proximal bone augmentation, APC) and Group 2 (17 patients reconstructed with total femur prosthesis, TFP). Less than 12 cm of remaining proximal femur were planned for all resections. RESULTS: MSTS score at 2 years is 25 ± 5 for Group 1 and 19 ± 7 for Group 2 (confidence interval [C.I.] 95%, p = 0.02). At 5 years it is 27 ± 2 for Group 1 and 22 ± 6 for Group 2 (C.I. 95%, p = 0.047). Failure and complication rates are lower for Group 1, but no statistical significance was reached. In APC reconstruction, union at the host-allograft junction was achieved in 16 out of 16 patients using the telescopic bone augmentation technique. CONCLUSIONS: APC provides higher functional results compared to TFP after extended distal femur resection. In APC reconstruction, telescopic augmentation is excellent for achieving union at the host-allograft junction.

A reduction in tumor volume exceeding 65% predicts a good histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with Ewing sarcoma.

OBJECTIVE: No consensus exists for tumor volume response criteria in patients with Ewing sarcoma. This study aimed to identify an optimal cutoff for predicting a good histological response by analyzing tumor volume changes and tumor necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 184 Ewing sarcoma patients, analyzing tumor volume changes before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were divided into two groups based on histological response: good (tumor necrosis ≥ 95%) and poor (tumor necrosis < 95%) responders. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) method was used to determine the optimal thresholds for predicting the histological response. Additionally, the prognostic value of this cutoff for relapse-free survival was assessed. RESULTS: Out of 184 patients, 83 (45%) had tumor necrosis ≥ 95%, while 101 (55%) had tumor necrosis < 95%. ROC analysis identified the optimal cutoff for a good histological response as over 65% tumor volume reduction (AUC = 0.69; p < 0.001). Patients with volume reduction of ≥ 65% had a higher likelihood of a good histological response than those with lesser reductions (p = 0.004; odds ratio = 2.61). Multivariable analysis indicated a correlation between poor histological response and reduced relapse-free survival (hazard ratio = 2.17; p = 0.01), while tumor volume reduction itself did not impact survival. CONCLUSION: We reported that a tumor volume reduction of ≥ 65% was able to predict a good histological response in Ewing sarcoma patients. We recommend preoperative tumor volume assessment to identify patients at greater risk for poor histological response who could benefit from more intensive chemotherapy protocols or additional radiotherapy.

Malawer type I/V proximal humerus reconstruction after tumor resection: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Several reconstruction methods exist for Malawer type I/V proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection; however, no consensus has been reached regarding the preferred methods. METHODS: We conducted a literature search on various types of proximal humerus oncologic reconstruction methods. We collected data on postoperative functional outcomes assessed based on Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores, 5-year reconstruction survival rates, and complications. We calculated each reconstruction's weighted mean based on the sample size and standard errors. Complications were categorized based on the Henderson classification. Based on these integrated data, our primary objective is to propose an optimal strategy for proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection. RESULTS: We examined various reconstruction techniques, including modular prosthesis (752 patients in 21 articles), osteoarticular allograft (142 patients in 6 articles), allograft prosthesis composites (APCs) (236 patients in 12 articles), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (141 patients in 10 articles), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (33 patients in 4 articles), claviculo-pro-humero (CPH) technique (51 patients in 6 articles), and cement spacer (207 patients in 4 articles). Weighted mean MSTS scores were: modular prosthesis (73.8%), osteoarticular allograft (74.4%), APCs (79.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (77.0%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (76.1%), CPH technique (75.1%), and cement spacer (69.1%). Weighted 5-year reconstruction survival rates were modular prosthesis (85.4%), osteoarticular allograft (67.6%), APCs (85.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (84.1%), and cement spacer (88.0%). Reconstruction survival data was unavailable for composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty and CPH technique. Major complications included shoulder joint instability: modular prosthesis (26.2%), osteoarticular allograft (41.5%), APCs (33.9%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (17%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (6.1%), CPH technique (2.0%), and cement spacer (8.7%). Aseptic loosening of the prosthesis occurred: modular prosthesis (3.9%) and reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (5.7%). Allograft fracture was observed in 54.9% of patients with osteoarticular allograft. CONCLUSION: The complication profiles differed among reconstruction methods. Weighted mean MSTS scores exceeded 70% in all methods except cement spacer, and the 5-year reconstruction survival rate surpassed 80% for all methods except osteoarticular allograft. Proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection should consider potential complications and patients' individual factors.

Histological and imaging features of myoepithelial carcinoma of the bone and soft tissue.

OBJECTIVE: To depict histological and imaging features of myoepithelial carcinoma of the bone and soft tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined histological features in 22 patients with myoepithelial carcinoma of the bone (4 patients) and soft tissue (18 patients) at a single institution. Imaging analysis of 15 patients (bone, 3 patients; soft tissue, 12 patients;) with preoperative images involved classifying lytic bone lesions via the modified Lodwick-Madewell classification; the growth patterns of soft tissue lesions were classified as well-defined, focally invasive, or diffusely invasive. RESULTS: Local recurrence occurred in eight out of 22 patients (36.3%). Four of 22 patients (18.2%) had metastasis at presentation, whereas 11 of 22 patients (50.0%) had distant metastasis during follow-up. Severe cytological pleomorphism was observed in 14 of 22 patients (63.6%), and 10 of 22 tumors (45.5%) showed ≥ 10 mitoses/10 high-power fields. Vascular invasion was observed in 10 of 22 patients (45.5%). Extracapsular/extraskeletal infiltration into the surrounding tissues was assessed in 20 patients, with 14 of them (70%) showing infiltration beyond the tumor border. Regarding imaging of bone lesions, two patients had Ludwick type IIIB, whereas one patient had type II. The growth pattern of soft tissue lesions was well-defined in two patients (16.7%), focally invasive in seven patients (58.3%), and diffusely invasive in three (25.0%) out of 12 patients. CONCLUSION: Myoepithelial carcinoma of the bone and soft tissue presents high risk of local recurrence and distant metastasis. Histological and imaging features might be important to understand the aggressive behavior of the tumor.

Risk of complications and implant survival of surgical treatment of proximal femoral metastasis: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The patients with femoral metastasis in the inter- or subtrochanteric area could be treated with intramedullary nailing or prosthetic reconstruction, however, it is controversial which surgical treatment could offer less complications and implant failure. Our purpose was to define the risk of complications and implant survival in patients treated with intramedullary nailing or prosthetic reconstruction. METHODS: We analyzed studies reporting the risk of complications, reoperations and removal of the implant in patients treated with intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty, arthroplasty or megaprosthesis. RESULTS: We analyzed 27 studies (1346 patients) reporting patients treated with intramedullary nail (51%), hemiarthroplasty (15%), arthroplasty (2%), megaprosthesis with (25%) or without (7%) acetabular component. No difference was found in the overall risk of complications between patients treated with intramedullary nailing 6%, hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty 7% and megaprosthesis 11% (p = 0.23). However, patients treated with megaprosthesis had increased risk of reoperation due to infection (70%), compared to the patients treated with intramedullary nail (13%), and patients treated with hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty (23%) (p = 0.02). Revision due to disease progression was required in 61% of the patients treated with intramedullary nail, but not in patients treated with hemiarthroplasty, total arthroplasty, and megaprosthesis (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with megaprosthesis had higher risk of reoperation due to infection, while patients treated with intramedullary nailing had higher risk of revision due to disease progression. Regarding patients treated with megaprosthesis, the risk of reoperation due to dislocation was higher in those treated with acetabular component.

Similar complications, implant survival, and function following modular prosthesis and allograft-prosthesis composite reconstructions of the proximal femur for primary bone tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of consensus regarding the best type of reconstruction of the proximal femur following bone tumor resection. The objective of this study was to analyze the complication risks, implant survival, and functional outcomes following modular prosthesis (MP) and allograft-prosthesis composite (APC) reconstruction of the proximal femur after primary bone tumor resections. METHODS: We performed a search in the PubMed and Scopus libraries, obtaining 1 843 studies. We included studies reporting functional outcomes, complications, and implant survival of proximal femur reconstruction with MP or APC following primary bone tumor resection with a 2-year minimum follow-up. We excluded studies analyzing metastatic patients or studies with pooled data in which it was impossible to separate the data of patients with primary bone tumors from those with bone metastases. RESULTS: We analyzed 18 studies (483 patients) reporting on 234 (48%) patients with MP reconstruction and 249 (52%) patients with APC reconstruction. The risk of complications was similar in patients with MP reconstruction (29%; 95% CI [0.11; 0.47]) and APC reconstruction (36%; 95% CI [0.24; 0.47]) (p = 0.48). Implant survival following MP reconstruction ranged from 81 to 86% at 5 years, 75 to 86% at 10 years, and 82% at 15 years. Implant survival following APC reconstruction ranged from 86 to 100% at 5 years and 86% at 10 years, and 86% at 15 years. Functional outcomes following MP reconstruction and APC reconstruction ranged from 24.0 to 28.3 and from 21.9 to 27.8, respectively. CONCLUSION: Patients with primary bone tumor of the proximal femur who underwent MP or APC reconstruction seem to have similar complication risks, implant survival, and functional outcomes.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in High-Grade Myxoid Liposarcoma: Results of the Expanded Cohort of a Randomized Trial From Italian (ISG), Spanish (GEIS), French (FSG), and Polish Sarcoma Groups (PSG).

PURPOSE: A randomized trial was conducted to compare neoadjuvant standard (S) anthracycline + ifosfamide (AI) regimen with histology-tailored (HT) regimen in selected localized high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS). The results of the trial demonstrated the superiority of S in all STS histologies except for high-grade myxoid liposarcoma (HG-MLPS) where S and HT appeared to be equivalent. To further evaluate the noninferiority of HT compared with S, the HG-MLPS cohort was expanded. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had localized high-grade (cellular component >5%; size ≥5 cm; deeply seated) MLPS of extremities or trunk wall. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary end point was overall survival (OS). The trial used a noninferiority Bayesian design, wherein HT would be considered not inferior to S if the posterior probability of the true hazard ratio (HR) being >1.25 was <5%. RESULTS: From May 2011 to June 2020, 101 patients with HG-MLPS were randomly assigned, 45 to the HT arm and 56 to the S arm. The median follow-up was 66 months (IQR, 37-89). Median size was 107 mm (IQR, 84-143), 106 mm (IQR, 75-135) in the HT arm and 108 mm (IQR, 86-150) in the S arm. At 60 months, the DFS and OS probabilities were 0.86 and 0.73 (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.24 to 1.46]; log-rank P = .26 for DFS) and 0.88 and 0.90 (HR, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.37 to 3.93]; log-rank P = .77 for OS) in the HT and S arms, respectively. The posterior probability of HR being >1.25 for DFS met the Bayesian monitoring cutoff of <5% (4.93%). This result confirmed the noninferiority of trabectedin to AI suggested in the original study cohort. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin may be an alternative to standard AI in HG-MLPS of the extremities or trunk when neoadjuvant treatment is a consideration.

What Is the Revision-free Survival of Resurfaced Allograft-prosthesis Composites for Proximal Humerus Reconstruction in Children With Bone Tumors?

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of the proximal humerus in children who undergo bone tumor resection is challenging because of patients' small bone size and possible limb length discrepancy at the end of skeletal growth due to loss of the physis. There are several options for proximal humerus reconstruction in children, such as clavicula pro humero, free vascularized fibula grafting, massive bone osteoarticular allografting, endoprostheses, and allograft-prosthesis composites, but no consensus exists on the best method for reconstruction. Resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites could be an alternative surgical option, but little is known about the results of this surgical technique. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the complications and what is the survivorship free from reconstruction failure associated with resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites in a small, single-center case series? (2) What Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores do patients achieve after reconstructions with resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites? METHODS: This study was a retrospective, single-arm case analysis in a single institution. We generally considered resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites in children with malignant bone tumors involving the metaepiphysis of the proximal humerus in whom there was no evidence of joint contamination and in whom axillary nerve preservation was possible. Between 2003 and 2021, we treated 100 children (younger than 15 years) with bone tumors of the humerus. Thirty children (30%) with diaphyseal tumors (21 children) or distal tumors (9 children) were excluded. Among the potentially eligible children, 52 were not analyzed because they were treated with other procedures such as amputation, modular prostheses, cement spacers, free vascularized fibula grafting, and massive bone osteoarticular allografts. We included 18 children (26% of the potentially eligible children) who were treated with resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites. There were 9 boys and 9 girls, with a median age of 10 years (range 4 to 15 years) at the time of diagnosis. A long stem (≥ 6 cm) in the resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composite was used in 9 children and a short stem (< 6 cm) was used in the remaining 9. One of the 18 children had a follow-up of less than 2 years. The median follow-up of the remaining 17 children was 4.7 years (range 2 to 19 years). The children' medical records were reviewed for clinical and functional outcomes. We performed a competing risk analysis to calculate the reconstruction failure-free survival of resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites. Reconstruction failure was defined as removal of the implant or allograft because of implant loosening or breakage and allograft fracture or resorption. We analyzed the children's postoperative complications and functional outcomes at the end of the follow-up period using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional scoring system. RESULTS: The competing risk analysis revealed that reconstruction failure was 25% (95% confidence interval 7% to 40%) at 3 years, reaching a plateau. Four of 18 children underwent surgical revision with a new reconstruction. The reasons for reconstruction revision were resorption of the allograft at the proximal part (2 children) and fracture of the allograft (2 children). Reconstruction revision was performed in 3 of 9 children who underwent reconstruction with a short stem and in 1 of 9 children who underwent reconstruction with a long stem. Several children had other complications that did not result in removal of the allograft. Allograft resorption was observed in 4 of 18 children, but no additional surgical treatment was performed. Shoulder instability or subluxation was observed in 4 of 18 children, but only 1 child underwent surgery with a reverse shoulder arthroplasty without removal of the resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composite. Limited elbow motion because of plate impingement was observed in 1 child who underwent surgical cutting of the protruding distal part of the plate. Incomplete radial nerve palsy after surgery occurred in 1 child, with spontaneous resolution after 2 months. Screw loosening occurred in 2 children who underwent surgery with removal of loose screws. Two children had a nonunion at the graft-host bone junction; 1 child underwent surgery with bone grafting and refixation of the graft-host bone junction, and the other child with both nonunion and plate breakage was treated with bone grafting and refixation of the graft-host bone junction with a new plate. Among 17 children who had a follow-up longer than 2 years, the median Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional score at the last follow-up interval was 23 of 30 (range 20 to 26); 1 child was considered to have an excellent result (functional score ≥ 26), 15 children were considered to have a good result (functional score 21 to 25), and 1 child was considered to have a fair result (functional score ≤ 20). The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society functional score did not change after excluding 4 children who underwent replacement of resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites (24 of 30 [range 20 to 26]). The median angle of flexion of the shoulder was 40° (range 20º to 90°), and the median angle of abduction was 30° (range 20º to 90°). CONCLUSION: Resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composites showed a high risk of complications, but not all complications resulted in removal of the reconstructed allograft. We used this technique mainly for very young children with small bones and for older children who underwent axillary nerve preservation. Although its success may be limited owing to a high risk of complications, a resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composite could be an alternative surgical option in order to preserve the bone stock and achieve good functional outcomes in very young children. We recommend using a long-stem resurfaced allograft-prosthesis composite, which may reduce the risk of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Outcomes of Long Bones Treated With Carbon-Fiber Nails for Oncologic Indications: International Multi-institutional Study.

BACKGROUND: Intramedullary nail fixation is commonly used for prophylactic stabilization of impending and fixation of complete pathological fractures of the long bones. However, metallic artifacts complicate imaging evaluation for bone healing or tumor progression and postoperative radiation planning. Carbon-fiber implants have gained popularity as an alternative, given their radiolucency and superior axial bending. This study evaluates incidences of mechanical and nonmechanical complications. METHODS: Adult patients (age 18 years and older) treated with carbon-fiber nails for impending/complete pathological long bone fractures secondary to metastases from 2013 to 2020 were analyzed for incidences and risk factors of mechanical and nonmechanical complications. Mechanical complications included aseptic screw loosening and structural failures of host bone and carbon-fiber implants. Deep infection and tumor progression were considered nonmechanical. Other complications/adverse events were also reported. RESULTS: A total of 239 patients were included; 47% were male, and 53% were female, with a median age of 68 (IQR, 59 to 75) years. Most common secondary metastases were related to breast cancer (19%), lung cancer (19%), multiple myeloma (18%), and sarcoma (13%). In total, 17 of 30 patients with metastatic sarcoma received palliative intramedullary nail fixation for impending/complete pathological fractures, and 13 of 30 received prophylactic nail stabilization of bone radiated preoperatively to manage juxta-osseous soft-tissue sarcomas, where partial resection of the periosteum or bone was necessary for negative margin resection. 33 (14%) patients had complications. Mechanical failures included 4 (1.7%) structural host bone failures, 7 (2.9%) implant structural failures, and 1 (0.4%) aseptic loosening of distal locking screws. Nonmechanical failures included 8 (3.3%) peri-implant infections and 15 (6.3%) tumor progressions with implant contamination. The 90-day and 1-year mortalities were 28% (61/239) and 53% (53/102), respectively. The literature reported comparable failure and mortality rates with conventional titanium treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Carbon-fiber implants might be an alternative for treating impending and sustained pathological fractures secondary to metastatic bone disease. The seemingly comparable complication profile warrants further cohort studies comparing carbon-fiber and titanium nail complications.

Reoperation after surgery for bone metastasis of renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prognosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has markedly improved with the advent of molecular targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the therapeutic response in patients with bone metastasis remains low; therefore, surgery still plays a significant role in treatment of bone metastasis. It is important to maintain quality of life for patients with bone metastasis from RCC and avoid reoperation after surgery for bone metastasis. Therefore, we investigated the risk factors for reoperation after surgery in patients with bone metastasis from RCC. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 103 bones of 97 patients who underwent surgery for bone metastasis of RCC from 2001 to 2023 at our institutions. RESULTS: Reoperation was performed in 10 (9.7%) of 103 bones. There was no correlation between reoperation-free survival and any of the following variables: preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy, site of bone metastasis, indication for surgery (solitary bone metastasis or impending or pathologic fractures), surgical method (intramedullary nailing fixation, curettage, or en bloc resection), preoperative embolization, or survival. CONCLUSION: The risk of reoperation for bone metastasis of RCC does not appear to be based on the surgical method.

Diagnostic challenges in low-grade central osteosarcoma.

Aims: Low-grade central osteosarcoma (LGCOS), a rare type of osteosarcoma, often has misleading radiological and pathological features that overlap with those of other bone tumours, thereby complicating diagnosis and treatment. We aimed to analyze the clinical, radiological, and pathological features of patients with LGCOS, with a focus on diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 49 patients with LGCOS (Broder's grade 1 to 2) treated between January 1985 and December 2017 in a single institute. We examined the presence of malignant features on imaging (periosteal reaction, cortical destruction, soft-tissue invasion), the diagnostic accuracy of biopsy, surgical treatment, and oncological outcome. Results: Based on imaging, 35 of 49 patients (71.4%) exhibited malignant features. Overall, 40 of 49 patients (81.6%) had undergone a biopsy before en-bloc resection: 27 of 40 patients (67.5%) were diagnosed on the first biopsy, which was more accurate when carried out by open rather than needle biopsy (91.3% vs 35.3% diagnostic accuracy, respectively; p < 0.001). Of the 40 patients treated by en-bloc resection, surgical margins were wide in 38 (95.0%) and marginal in two (5.0%). Furthermore, nine of 49 patients (18.4%) underwent curettage (intralesional margin) without previous biopsy. All patients with a positive margin developed local recurrence. Distant metastases occurred in five of 49 patients (10.2%). The mean five-year overall survival (OS) and distant relapse-free survival (D-RFS) were 89.3% (SD 5.1%) and 85.7% (SD 5.5%), respectively. Univariate analysis showed that the occurrence of distant metastasis was a poor prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio 11.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.92 to 69.17; p < 0.001). Local recurrence was a poor prognostic factor for D-RFS (HR 8.72, 95% CI 1.69 to 45.0; p = 0.002). Conclusion: The diagnosis of LGCOS can be challenging because it may present with non-malignant features and has a low diagnostic accuracy on biopsy. If precisely diagnosed, LGCOS can be successfully treated by surgical excision with wide margins.

Lengthening Patients Previously Treated for Massive Lower Limb Reconstruction for Bone Tumors with the PRECICE 2 Nail.

The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of the PRECICE 2® nail in the treatment of lower limb length discrepancy in patients with a history of bone tumors. This study reports on outcomes, complications, and the safety of the PRECICE 2 limb lengthening nail in a cohort of pediatric patients with limb length discrepancy after surgery for bone tumors. Seventeen patients were treated with intramedullary magnetic nails. The average patient age at the time of surgery was 19 (range 11-32). The PRECICE 2 nail was used on 14 femurs (6 retrograde and 8 anterograde) and 3 tibias. The average consolidation time was 141 days (range 50-360) with a mean CI of 31 ± 12 days/cm. The ASAMI bone score showed 14 (82%) excellent results, 1 (6%) good result, and 2 (12%) poor results. The ASAMI functional score showed 13 (84.6%) excellent results, 3 (11.5%) good results, and 1 (3.8%) fair result. Patients treated with chemotherapy for bone cancer did not show any increase in distraction time or consolidation time. A total of 3 (17%) problems, 1 obstacle (5.5%), and 1 complication (5.5%) were encountered in our case series. The PRECICE 2 nail allows for effective and accurate lengthening preserving the range of motion in patients treated for bone tumors.

NTRK rearranged sarcoma of the bone. Role for larotrectinib in the neoadjuvant setting of an ultra-rare tumor: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene-fusion targeted molecules revolutionized the paradigm of treatment of a limited subgroup of cancers of various histologies. Entrectinib and larotrectinib obtained unprecedented response rates in patients with cancer harboring NTRK rearrangements. This evidence recently led to the agnostic approval of these drugs, and evidence (confirmation) of their activity in a broader disease setting is emerging. Here, we report the case of a patient affected by EML4-NTRK3 rearranged undifferentiated spindle cell bone sarcoma treated with larotrectinib, and we argue (discuss about) the incidence and clinical presentation of NTRK gene-fusion positive bone sarcomas, the potential use of upfront treatment with NTRK inhibitors in neoadjuvant setting, and the role of a multidisciplinary tumor board. Despite the rarity of these rearrangements in patients with primitive bone sarcomas, the therapy with NTRK inhibitors represents a highly effective strategy to be pursued in selected cases even in neoadjuvant settings. The management of these very rare cancers should always be discussed in a multidisciplinary board of reference centers.

Silver-Coated Distal Femur Megaprosthesis in Chronic Infections with Severe Bone Loss: A Multicentre Case Series.

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) and fracture-related infections (FRI) of the distal femur (DF) may result in massive bone defects. Treatment options include articulated silver-coated (SC) megaprosthesis (MP) in the context of a two-stage protocol. However, there is limited evidence in the literature on this topic. A retrospective review of the prospectively maintained databases of three Institutions was performed. Forty-five patients were included. The mean follow-up time was 43 ± 17.1 months. Eight (17.8%) patients had a recurrent infection. The estimated recurrence-free survival rate was 91.1% (93.5% PJI vs. 85.7% FRI) 2 years following MP implantation, and 75.7% (83.2% PJI vs. 64.3% FRI; p = 0.253) after 5 years. No statistically relevant difference was found according to the initial diagnosis (PJI vs. FRI). Among possible risk factors, only resection length was found to significantly worsen the outcomes in terms of infection control (p = 0.031). A total of eight complications not related to infection were found after reimplantation, but only five of them required further surgery. Above-the-knee amputation was performed in two cases (4.4%), both for reinfection. Articulated DF SC MP in a two-stage protocol is a safe and effective treatment for chronic knee infection with severe bone loss.

What to choose in bone tumour resections? Patient specific instrumentation versus surgical navigation: a systematic review.

Patient specific instrumentation (PSI) and intraoperative surgical navigation (SN) can significantly help in achieving wide oncological margins while sparing bone stock in bone tumour resections. This is a systematic review aimed to compare the two techniques on oncological and functional results, preoperative time for surgical planning, surgical intraoperative time, intraoperative technical complications and learning curve. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO database (CRD42023422065). 1613 papers were identified and 81 matched criteria for PRISMA inclusion and eligibility. PSI and SN showed similar results in margins (0-19% positive margins rate), bone cut accuracy (0.3-4 mm of error from the planned), local recurrence and functional reconstruction scores (MSTS 81-97%) for both long bones and pelvis, achieving better results compared to free hand resections. A planned bone margin from tumour of at least 5 mm was safe for bone resections, but soft tissue margin couldn't be planned when the tumour invaded soft tissues. Moreover, long osteotomies, homogenous bone topology and restricted working spaces reduced accuracy of both techniques, but SN can provide a second check. In urgent cases, SN is more indicated to avoid PSI planning and production time (2-4 weeks), while PSI has the advantage of less intraoperative using time (1-5 min vs 15-65 min). Finally, they deemed similar technical intraoperative complications rate and demanding learning curve. Overall, both techniques present advantages and drawbacks. They must be considered for the optimal choice based on the specific case. In the future, robotic-assisted resections and augmented reality might solve the downsides of PSI and SN becoming the main actors of bone tumour surgery.