Precise Resection and Biological Reconstruction for Patients with Bone Sarcomas in the Proximal Humerus

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background It is a challenge to perform a joint-preserving resection for patients with bone sarcomas in the proximal humerus. We determined whether osteotomy under navigation guidance made joint-saving resection possible for juxtaarticular humeral sarcomas while adhering to oncological principles.

Method Between January 2008 and July 2010, joint-preserving surgeries were performed on six patients with proximal humeral sarcomas under navigation guidance. Five tumors extended to, and one extended beyond, the epiphyseal line. Planned osteotomy under image-guided navigation was employed to achieve a clear surgical margin while preserving the humeral head and rotator cuff. All tumors were removed en bloc and intercalary defects were reconstructed by a combination of allograft and vascularized fibula graft. All specimens were examined for resection margin. Patients were followed up for an average of 19.1 months.

Results The entire glenohumeral joint was preserved in five patients and part of the humeral head was saved in one patient. Clear surgical margin was obtained in all specimens. The minimum closest distance between the osteotomy line and tumor edge was 7 mm. No patient experienced local recurrence. One patient developed lung metastasis and was alive with disease. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 score was 92.1%. All reconstruction was in situ at final follow-up.

Conclusion With careful patient selection, image navigation-assisted surgery made it possible to excise the bone exactly as seen in orientation in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image, yielding a clear margin and preserving all or part of the humeral head in limb salvage procedures for patients with juxtaarticular bone sarcomas in proximal humerus.

Level of Evidence Therapeutic study; Level IV.

• References

• 1 Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Delling G , et al. Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: an analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 776-790
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Wittig JC, Bickels J, Kellar-Graney KL, Kim FH, Malawer MM. Osteosarcoma of the proximal humerus: long-term results with limb-sparing surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; 397: 156-176
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Arndt CA, Crist WM. Common musculoskeletal tumors of childhood and adolescence. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 342-352
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Alman BA, De Bari A, Krajbich JI. Massive allografts in the treatment of osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma in children and adolescents. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77: 54-64
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Jesus-Garcia R, Seixas MT, Costa SR, Petrilli AS, Laredo Filho J. Epiphyseal plate involvement in osteosarcoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000; 373: 32-38
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Abdeen A, Hoang BH, Athanasian EA, Morris CD, Boland PJ, Healey JH. Allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction of the proximal part of the humerus: functional outcome and survivorship. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 2406-2415
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Ayoub KS, Fiorenza F, Grimer RJ, Tillman RM, Carter SR. Extensible endoprostheses of the humerus after resection of bone tumours. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999; 81: 495-500
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Black AW, Szabo RM, Titelman RM. Treatment of malignant tumors of the proximal humerus with allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2007; 16: 525-533
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Getty PJ, Peabody TD. Complications and functional outcomes of reconstruction with an osteoarticular allograft after intraarticular resection of the proximal aspect of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999; 81: 1138-1146
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Potter BK, Adams SC, Pitcher Jr JD, Malinin TI, Temple HT. Proximal humerus reconstructions for tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 1035-1041
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Cho HS, Oh JH, Han I, Kim HS. Joint-preserving limb salvage surgery under navigation guidance. J Surg Oncol 2009; 100: 227-232
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Aponte-Tinao LA, Ranalletta M. Partial epiphyseal preservation and intercalary allograft reconstruction in high-grade metaphyseal osteosarcoma of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86-A: 2686-2693
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Li J, Wang Z, Pei GX, Guo Z. Biological reconstruction using massive bone allograft with intramedullary vascularized fibular flap after intercalary resection of humeral malignancy. J Surg Oncol 2011; 104: 244-249
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Rose PS, Shin AY, Bishop AT, Moran SL, Sim FH. Vascularized free fibula transfer for oncologic reconstruction of the humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 438: 80-84
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Wong KC, Kumta SM, Antonio GE, Tse LF. Image fusion for computer-assisted bone tumor surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466: 2533-2541
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Enneking WF. A system of staging musculoskeletal neoplasms. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986; 204: 9-24
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Kumta SM, Chow TC, Griffith J, Li CK, Kew J, Leung PC. Classifying the location of osteosarcoma with reference to the epiphyseal plate helps determine the optimal skeletal resection in limb salvage procedures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1999; 119: 327-331
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Enneking WF, Dunham W, Gebhardt MC, Malawar M, Pritchard DJ. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993; 286: 241-246
  Google Scholar
• 19 Hoffer FA, Nikanorov AY, Reddick WE , et al. Accuracy of MR imaging for detecting epiphyseal extension of osteosarcoma. Pediatr Radiol 2000; 30: 289-298
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar