TY - JOUR
T1 - Periacetabular reconstruction following limb-salvage surgery for pelvic sarcomas
AU - Fujiwara, Tomohiro
AU - Ogura, Koichi
AU - Christ, Alexander
AU - Bartelstein, Meredith
AU - Kenan, Shachar
AU - Fabbri, Nicola
AU - Healey, John
N1 - Funding Information:
We acknowledge financial support by a grant-in-aid for overseas research fellowships from the Yasuda Medical Foundation (2018; TF) and a grant-in-aid for overseas research fellowships from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (201860336; TF).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Limb-salvage surgery for pelvic sarcomas remains one of the most challenging surgical procedures for musculoskeletal oncologists. In the past several decades, various surgical techniques have been developed for periacetabular reconstruction following pelvic tumor resection. These methods include endoprosthetic reconstruction, allograft or autograft reconstruction, arthrodesis, and hip transposition. Each of these procedures has its own advantages and disadvantages, and there is no consensus or gold standard for periacetabular reconstruction. Consequently, this review provides an overview of the clinical outcomes for each of these reconstructive options following pelvic tumor resections. Overall, high complication rates are associated with the use of massive implants/grafts, and deep infection is generally the most common cause of reconstruction failure. Functional outcomes decline with the occurrence of severe complications. Further efforts to avoid complications using innovative techniques, such as antibiotic-laden devices, computer navigation, custom cutting jigs, and reduced use of implants/grafts, are crucial to improve outcomes, especially in patients at a high risk of complications.
AB - Limb-salvage surgery for pelvic sarcomas remains one of the most challenging surgical procedures for musculoskeletal oncologists. In the past several decades, various surgical techniques have been developed for periacetabular reconstruction following pelvic tumor resection. These methods include endoprosthetic reconstruction, allograft or autograft reconstruction, arthrodesis, and hip transposition. Each of these procedures has its own advantages and disadvantages, and there is no consensus or gold standard for periacetabular reconstruction. Consequently, this review provides an overview of the clinical outcomes for each of these reconstructive options following pelvic tumor resections. Overall, high complication rates are associated with the use of massive implants/grafts, and deep infection is generally the most common cause of reconstruction failure. Functional outcomes decline with the occurrence of severe complications. Further efforts to avoid complications using innovative techniques, such as antibiotic-laden devices, computer navigation, custom cutting jigs, and reduced use of implants/grafts, are crucial to improve outcomes, especially in patients at a high risk of complications.
KW - Acetabulum
KW - Limb-salvage
KW - Pelvis
KW - Reconstruction
KW - Sarcoma
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117837310&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85117837310&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jbo.2021.100396
DO - 10.1016/j.jbo.2021.100396
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85117837310
SN - 2212-1374
VL - 31
JO - Journal of Bone Oncology
JF - Journal of Bone Oncology
M1 - 100396
ER -