Hypotensive Epidural Anesthesia Reduces Blood Loss in Pelvic and Sacral Bone Tumor Resections.

BACKGROUND: Resection of pelvic and sacral tumors can cause severe blood loss, complications, and even postoperative death. Hypotensive epidural anesthesia has been used to mitigate blood loss after elective arthroplasty, but to our knowledge, it has not been studied as an approach that might make resection of pelvic and sacral tumors safer. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were (1) to compare the blood loss and blood product use for patients undergoing pelvic and sacral tumor surgery under standard anesthesia or hypotensive epidural anesthesia; (2) to assess the frequency of end-organ damage with the two techniques; and (3) to compare 90-day mortality between the two techniques. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2014, 285 major pelvic and sacral resections were performed at one center. A total of 174 (61%) had complete data sets for analysis of blood loss, transfusion use, complications, and mortality at 90 days. Of those, 102 (59%) underwent hypotensive epidural anesthesia, whereas the remainder received standard anesthetic care. The anesthetic approach was determined by the anesthetists in charge of the case with hypotensive epidural anesthesia exclusively performed by one of two subspecialty trained anesthetists as their routine for major pelvic or sacral surgery. The groups were comparable in terms of potential confounding variables such as age, gender, tumor volume, and operation performed. Hypotensive epidural anesthesia was defined as a technique using an extensive epidural block up to T2-3 dermatome, peripherally administered low-concentration intravenous adrenaline infusion, and using unimpeded spontaneous respiration to achieve controlled hypotension, precise rate control of the heart, and enhanced velocity of venous return, all aggregated thus to minimize blood loss during pelvic surgery while preserving vital perfusion. The groups were assessed for perioperative blood loss calculated from pre- and postsurgery hemoglobin and transfusion use as well as postoperative complications, morbidity, and mortality at 90 days. RESULTS: There was less mean blood loss in the hypotensive epidural anesthesia group (1457 mL, SD 1721, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1114-1801 versus 2421 mL, SD 2297, 95% CI, 1877-2965; p = 0.003). Patients in the hypotensive epidural anesthesia group on average received fewer packed red cell transfusions (2.7 units, SD 2.9, 95% CI, 2.1-3.2 versus 3.9 units, SD 4.4, 95% CI, 2.9-5.0; p = 0.03). There were no differences in the proportions of patients experiencing end-organ injury (7%, n = seven of 102 versus 6%, n = four of 72; p = 0.72). With the numbers available, there was no difference in 90-day mortality rate between groups (1.9%, n = two of 102 versus 1.3%, n = one of 72; p = 0.77). CONCLUSIONS: We found that hypotensive epidural anesthesia resulted in less blood loss, fewer transfusions, and no apparent increase in serious complications in pelvic and sacral tumor surgery performed in the setting of a high-volume tertiary sarcoma referral hospital. We recommend that further collaborative studies be undertaken to confirm our results with hypotensive epidural anesthesia in surgery for pelvic tumors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

A Novel System for the Surgical Staging of Primary High-grade Osteosarcoma: The Birmingham Classification.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy response and surgical margins have been shown to be associated with the risk of local recurrence in patients with osteosarcoma. However, existing surgical staging systems fail to reflect the response to chemotherapy or define an appropriate safe metric distance from the tumor that will allow complete excision and closely predict the chance of disease recurrence. We therefore sought to review a group of patients with primary high-grade osteosarcoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection and analyzed margins and chemotherapy response in terms of local recurrence. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What predictor or combination of predictors available to the clinician can be assessed that more reliably predict the likelihood of local recurrence? (2) Can we determine a better predictor of local recurrence-free survival than the currently applied system of surgical margins? (3) Can we determine a better predictor of overall survival than the currently applied system of surgical margins? METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with high-grade conventional osteosarcomas without metastasis at diagnosis treated at one center between 1997 and 2012 with preoperative chemotherapy followed by resection or amputation of the primary tumor who were younger than age 50 years with minimum 24-month followup for those still alive. A total of 389 participants matched the inclusion criteria. Univariate log-rank test and multivariate Cox analyses were undertaken to identify predictors of local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). The Birmingham classification was devised on the basis of two stems: the response to chemotherapy (good response = ≥ 90% necrosis; poor response = < 90% necrosis) and margins (< 2 mm or ≥ 2 mm). The 5-year overall survival rate was 67% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61%-71%) and 47 patients developed local recurrence (12%). RESULTS: Intralesional margins (hazard ratio [HR], 9.9; 95% CI, 1.2-82; p = 0.03 versus radical margin HR, 1) and a poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.7-8.4; p = 0.001 versus good response HR, 1) were independent risk factors for local recurrence (LR). The best predictor of LR, however, was a combination of margins ≤ 2 mm and a less than 90% necrosis response to chemotherapy (Birmingham 2b HR, 19.6; 95% CI, 2.6-144; p = 0.003 versus Birmingham 1a; margin >2 mm and more than 90% necrosis HR, 1). Two-stage Cox regression model and higher Harrell's C statistic demonstrate that the Birmingham classification was superior to the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) margin classification for predicting LR (Harrell's C statistic Birmingham classification 0.68, MSTS criteria 0.59). A difference in overall survival was seen between groups of the Birmingham classification (log-rank test p < 0.0001), whereas the MSTS margin system was not discriminatory (log-rank test p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Based on these observations, we believe that a combination of the recording of surgical margins in millimeters and the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy can more accurately predict the risk of local recurrence than the current MSTS system. A multicenter collaboration study initiated by the International Society of Limb Salvage is recommended to test the validity of the proposed classification and if these findings are confirmed, this classification system might be considered the standard practice in oncology centers treating patients with osteosarcomas and allow more effective communication of margin status for research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study.