Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
2.6
2.6
Journals
Current Oncology
Special Issues
Treatment of Bone Metastasis
share announcement

Treatment of Bone Metastasis

A special issue of Current Oncology (ISSN 1718-7729). This special issue belongs to the section "Bone and Soft Tissue Oncology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2022) | Viewed by 48327

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Costantino Errani

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
III Clinica di Ortopedia e Traumatologia, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, 40136 Bologna, Italy
Interests: bone tumors; soft tissue tumors; bone sarcomas; soft tissue sarcomas; bone metastases; limb salvage surgery
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The incidence of metastatic bone disease is increasing, as patients with cancer are living longer. Bone is the third most common site of metastatic disease, after the lungs and the liver. Long bone metastases are a common presentation in patients with advanced cancer, occurring in up to 70% of patients. In 2008, it was estimated that almost 300,000 patients with advanced cancer in the USA had skeletal metastases. Skeletal metastases can dramatically decrease the quality of life as a result of skeletal related events. In 2006, the financial burden of treating patients with metastatic bone disease in the USA per year was estimated at being approximately 12.6 billion dollars, which accounted for 17% of the total annual cost of cancer treatments. Patients with metastatic bone disease may seek medical care at community hospitals. Traditional management techniques involve a combination of pharmacotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgical procedures. Over the last few decades, advances in medical and surgical treatments have been proposed regarding the management of metastatic bone disease. Considering the limited expectancy of most patients with bone metastases, the main goal of novel medical and less invasive treatments is to improve the quality of life of patients with bone metastases, reducing the adverse effects related to the traditional medical or surgical treatments.

We are pleased to invite the submission of manuscripts focusing on new research on basic, clinical, and surgical research on the treatment of bone metastases.

The Special Issue aims to explore all area of treatment of bone metastases, including the following:

  • Surveillance imaging and diagnostic work up to ensure the accurate and timely identification of bone metastases.
  • Current systemic treatment options with zolendronic acid and denosumab in order to provide knowledge of innovative techniques in evolving therapies.
  • The role of interventional radiology: embolization, electro-chemotherapy, magnetic resonance imaging guided high-intensity focused ultrasound, and thermal ablation therapies.
  • The search for possible prognostic factors affecting survival: the life expectancy of patients with bone metastases seems to be the most important factor in determining the surgical treatment, avoiding over- or under-treatments.
  • The role of surgery: based on the risk of surgical complications, the patient’s prognosis seems to be important regarding the type of surgical treatment in a patient with bone metastases.

In this Special Issue, original research articles and reviews are welcome. Research areas may include (but are not limited to) the following: nuclear medicine, radiology, interventional radiology, orthopedics, and oncology.

We look forward to receiving your contributions.

Dr. Costantino Errani
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Current Oncology is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • bone metastases
  • imaging
  • prognostic factors
  • prognostic score
  • novel therapies
  • medical treatments
  • interventional radiology
  • surgery

Published Papers (13 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research, Review, Other

3 pages, 204 KiB  
Editorial
Treatment of Bone Metastasis
by Costantino Errani
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(8), 5195-5197; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29080411 - 22 Jul 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1765
Abstract
The incidence of metastatic bone disease is increasing, as patients with cancer are living longer [...] Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review, Other

12 pages, 3030 KiB  
Article
Outcomes of Intercalary Endoprostheses as a Treatment for Metastases in the Femoral and Humeral Diaphysis
by Michal Mahdal, Lukáš Pazourek, Vasileios Apostolopoulos, Dagmar Adámková Krákorová, Iva Staniczková Zambo and Tomáš Tomáš
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(5), 3519-3530; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29050284 - 13 May 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2975
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implant survival, functional score and complications of intercalary endoprostheses implanted for metastatic involvement of the femoral and humeral diaphysis. Methods: The selected group covered patients with bone metastasis who were surgically treated with [...] Read more.
Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implant survival, functional score and complications of intercalary endoprostheses implanted for metastatic involvement of the femoral and humeral diaphysis. Methods: The selected group covered patients with bone metastasis who were surgically treated with an intercalary endoprosthesis between 2012 and 2021. The functional outcome was evaluated with the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system, and complications were evaluated by using the failure classification for prosthetics designed by Henderson. Results: The mean follow-up was 29.8 months. In our group of 25 patients with 27 intercalary endoprostheses (18 femurs, 9 humeri), there were 7 implant-related complications (25.9%), which were more common on the humerus (4 cases, 44.4%) than on the femur (3 cases, 16.7%). Only type II failure—aseptic loosening (5 cases, 18.5%)—and type III failure—structural failure (2 cases, 7.4%)—occurred. There was a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening of the endoprosthesis in the humerus compared with that in the femur (odds ratio 13.79, 95% confidence interval 1.22–151.05, p = 0.0297). The overall cumulative implant survival was 92% 1 year after surgery and 72% 5 years after surgery. The average MSTS score was 82%. The MSTS score was significantly lower (p = 0.008) in the humerus (75.9%) than in the femur (84.8%). Conclusions: The resection of bone metastases and replacement with intercalary endoprosthesis has excellent immediate functional results with an acceptable level of complications in prognostically favourable patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1660 KiB  
Article
Megaprosthesis for Metastatic Bone Disease—A Comparative Analysis
by Joachim Thorkildsen, Thale Asp Strøm, Nils Jørgen Strøm, Simen Sellevold and Ole-Jacob Norum
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(5), 3460-3471; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29050279 - 10 May 2022
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2630
Abstract
Background: Megaprosthetic reconstruction is sometimes indicated in advanced metastatic bone disease (MBD) of the appendicular skeleton with large degrees of bone loss or need for oncological segmental resection. Outcome after megaprosthetic reconstruction was studied in the setting of primary bone sarcoma with high [...] Read more.
Background: Megaprosthetic reconstruction is sometimes indicated in advanced metastatic bone disease (MBD) of the appendicular skeleton with large degrees of bone loss or need for oncological segmental resection. Outcome after megaprosthetic reconstruction was studied in the setting of primary bone sarcoma with high levels of complications, but it is not known if this applies to MBD. Method: We performed a comparative analysis of complications and revision surgery for MBD and bone sarcoma surgery in an institutional cohort from 2005–2019. Presented are the descriptive data of the cohort, with Kaplan–Meier (K–M) rates of revision at 1, 2 and 5 years together with a competing risk analysis by indication type. Results: Rates of revision surgery are significantly lower for MBD (8% at 1 year, 12% at 2 years), in the intermediate term, compared to that of sarcoma (18% at 1 year, 24% at 2 years) (p = 0.04). At 5 years this is not significant by K–M analysis (25% for MBD, and 33% for sarcoma), but remains significant in a competing risk model (8% for MBD, and 20% for sarcoma) (p = 0.03), accounting for death as a competing event. Conclusion: Rates of revision surgery after megaprosthetic reconstruction of MBD are significantly lower than that for primary bone sarcoma in this cohort. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 889 KiB  
Article
Electrochemotherapy Is Effective in the Treatment of Bone Metastases
by Laura Campanacci, Luca Cevolani, Francesca De Terlizzi, Laura Saenz, Nikolin Alì, Giuseppe Bianchi and Davide Maria Donati
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(3), 1672-1682; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29030139 - 04 Mar 2022
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 2263
Abstract
Bone metastases induce pain, risk of fracture, and neural compression, and reduced mobility and quality of life. Electrochemotherapy (ECT) is a minimally invasive local treatment based on a high-voltage electric pulse combined with an anticancer drug. Preclinical and clinical studies have supported the [...] Read more.
Bone metastases induce pain, risk of fracture, and neural compression, and reduced mobility and quality of life. Electrochemotherapy (ECT) is a minimally invasive local treatment based on a high-voltage electric pulse combined with an anticancer drug. Preclinical and clinical studies have supported the use of ECT in patients with metastatic bone disease, demonstrating that it does not damage the mineral structure of the bone and its regenerative capacity, and that is feasible and efficient for the treatment of bone metastases. Since 2009, 88 patients with bone metastasis have received ECT at the Rizzoli Institute. 2014 saw the start of a registry of patients with bone metastases treated with ECT, whose data are recorded in a shared database. We share the Rizzoli Institute experience of 38 patients treated with ECT for a bone metastasis, excluding patients not included in the registry (before 2014) and those treated with bone fixation. Mean follow-up was 2 months (1–52). Response to treatment using RECIST criteria was 29% objective responses, 59% stable disease, and 16% progressive disease. Using PERCIST, the response was 36% OR, 14% SD, and 50% PD with no significant differences between the two criteria. A significant decrease in pain and better quality of life was observed at FU. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 1522 KiB  
Article
The Role of a Navigational Radiofrequency Ablation Device and Concurrent Vertebral Augmentation for Treatment of Difficult-to-Reach Spinal Metastases
by Claudio Pusceddu, Davide De Francesco, Luca Melis, Nicola Ballicu and Alessandro Fancellu
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(5), 4004-4015; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol28050340 - 08 Oct 2021
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 1900
Abstract
Aims: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a navigational radiofrequency ablation device with concurrent vertebral augmentation in the treatment of posterior vertebral body metastatic lesions, which are technically difficult to access. Primary outcomes of the study were evaluation [...] Read more.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a navigational radiofrequency ablation device with concurrent vertebral augmentation in the treatment of posterior vertebral body metastatic lesions, which are technically difficult to access. Primary outcomes of the study were evaluation of pain palliation and radiologic assessment of local tumor control. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five patients with 41 vertebral spinal metastases involving the posterior vertebral body underwent computed tomography-guided percutaneous targeted radiofrequency ablation, with a navigational radiofrequency ablation device, associated with vertebral augmentation. Twenty-one patients (60%) had 1 or 2 metastatic lesions (Group A) and fourteen (40%) patients had multiple (>2) vertebral lesions (Group B). Changes in pain severity were evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS). Metastatic lesions were evaluated in terms of radiological local control. Results: The procedure was technically successful in all the treated vertebrae. Among the symptomatic patients, the mean VAS score dropped from 5.7 (95% CI 4.9–6.5) before tRFA and to 0.9 (95% CI 0.4–1.3) after tRFA (p < 0.001). The mean decrease in VAS score between baseline and one week follow up was 4.8 (95% CI 4.2–5.4). VAS decrease over time between one week and one year following radiofrequency ablation was similar, suggesting that pain relief was immediate and durable. Neither patients with 1–2 vertebral metastases, nor those with multiple lesions, showed radiological signs of local progression or recurrence of the tumor in the index vertebrae during a median follow up of 19 months (4–46 months) and 10 months (4–37 months), respectively. Conclusion: Treatment of spinal metastases with a navigational radiofrequency ablation device and vertebral augmentation can be used to obtain local tumor control with immediate and durable pain relief, providing effective treatment in the multimodality management of difficult-to-reach spinal metastases. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1652 KiB  
Article
Impact of an Augmented Reality Navigation System (SIRIO) on Bone Percutaneous Procedures: A Comparative Analysis with Standard CT-Guided Technique
by Eliodoro Faiella, Gennaro Castiello, Caterina Bernetti, Giuseppina Pacella, Carlo Altomare, Flavio Andresciani, Bruno Beomonte Zobel and Rosario Francesco Grasso
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(3), 1751-1760; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol28030163 - 08 May 2021
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 2008
Abstract
(1) Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of an augmented reality navigation system (SIRIO) for percutaneous biopsies and ablative treatments on bone lesions, compared to a standard CT-guided technique. (2) Methods: Bioptic and ablative procedures on bone lesions [...] Read more.
(1) Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of an augmented reality navigation system (SIRIO) for percutaneous biopsies and ablative treatments on bone lesions, compared to a standard CT-guided technique. (2) Methods: Bioptic and ablative procedures on bone lesions were retrospectively analyzed. All procedures were divided into SIRIO and Non-SIRIO groups and in <2 cm and >2 cm groups. Number of CT-scans, procedural time and patient’s radiation dose were reported for each group. Diagnostic accuracy was obtained for bioptic procedures. (3) Results: One-hundred-ninety-three procedures were evaluated: 142 biopsies and 51 ablations. Seventy-four biopsy procedures were performed using SIRIO and 68 under standard CT-guidance; 27 ablative procedures were performed using SIRIO and 24 under standard CT-guidance. A statistically significant reduction in the number of CT-scans, procedural time and radiation dose was observed for percutaneous procedures performed using SIRIO, in both <2 cm and >2 cm groups. The greatest difference in all variables examined was found for procedures performed on lesions <2 cm. Higher diagnostic accuracy was found for all SIRIO-assisted biopsies. No major or minor complications occurred in any procedures. (4) Conclusions: The use of SIRIO significantly reduces the number of CT-scans, procedural time and patient’s radiation dose in CT-guided percutaneous bone procedures, particularly for lesions <2 cm. An improvement in diagnostic accuracy was also achieved in SIRIO-assisted biopsies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research, Other

23 pages, 931 KiB  
Review
Minimally Invasive Interventional Procedures for Metastatic Bone Disease: A Comprehensive Review
by Nicolas Papalexis, Anna Parmeggiani, Giuliano Peta, Paolo Spinnato, Marco Miceli and Giancarlo Facchini
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(6), 4155-4177; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29060332 - 07 Jun 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 3767
Abstract
Metastases are the main type of malignancy involving bone, which is the third most frequent site of metastatic carcinoma, after lung and liver. Skeletal-related events such as intractable pain, spinal cord compression, and pathologic fractures pose a serious burden on patients’ quality of [...] Read more.
Metastases are the main type of malignancy involving bone, which is the third most frequent site of metastatic carcinoma, after lung and liver. Skeletal-related events such as intractable pain, spinal cord compression, and pathologic fractures pose a serious burden on patients’ quality of life. For this reason, mini-invasive treatments for the management of bone metastases were developed with the goal of pain relief and functional status improvement. These techniques include embolization, thermal ablation, electrochemotherapy, cementoplasty, and MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound. In order to achieve durable pain palliation and disease control, mini-invasive procedures are combined with chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgery, or analgesics. The purpose of this review is to summarize the recently published literature regarding interventional radiology procedures in the treatment of cancer patients with bone metastases, focusing on the efficacy, complications, local disease control and recurrence rate. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 534 KiB  
Review
Outcomes of Hip Reconstruction for Metastatic Acetabular Lesions: A Scoping Review of the Literature
by Sandeep Krishan Nayar, Thomas A. Kostakos, Olga Savvidou, Konstantinos Vlasis and Panayiotis J. Papagelopoulos
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(6), 3849-3859; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29060307 - 26 May 2022
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 4122
Abstract
(1) Background: Management of metastatic periacetabular lesions remains a challenging area of orthopaedics. This study aims to evaluate and summarize the currently available reconstructive modalities, including their indications and outcomes. (2) Methods: A scoping review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. [...] Read more.
(1) Background: Management of metastatic periacetabular lesions remains a challenging area of orthopaedics. This study aims to evaluate and summarize the currently available reconstructive modalities, including their indications and outcomes. (2) Methods: A scoping review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane were searched for relevant articles. (3) Results: A total of 18 papers met inclusion criteria encompassing 875 patients. The most common primary malignancy was breast (n = 230, 26.3%). Reconstruction modalities used were total hip arthroplasty (n = 432, 49.1%), the Harrington procedure (n = 374, 42.5%), modular hemipelvic endoprotheses (n = 63, 7.2%) and a reverse ice-cream cone prosthesis (n = 11, 1.25%). (4) Conclusions: Advances in implant design including use of dual mobility or flanged cups, tantalum implants, and modular hemipelvic endoprostheses allow for larger acetabular defects to be addressed with improved patient outcomes. This armamentarium of reconstruction options allows for tailoring of the procedure performed depending on patient factors and extent of periacetabular disease. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 304 KiB  
Review
Bone Targeting Agents in Patients with Prostate Cancer: General Toxicities and Osteonecrosis of the Jaw
by Veronica Mollica, Giacomo Nuvola, Elisa Tassinari, Maria Concetta Nigro, Andrea Marchetti, Matteo Rosellini, Alessandro Rizzo, Costantino Errani and Francesco Massari
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(3), 1709-1722; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29030142 - 05 Mar 2022
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2988
Abstract
Introduction: Bone metastases are the most frequent site of secondary localization of prostate cancer (PCa) and are present in about 90% of cases of advanced disease. Consequently, an adequate management of bone involvement is of pivotal importance in the therapeutic approach and skeletal-related [...] Read more.
Introduction: Bone metastases are the most frequent site of secondary localization of prostate cancer (PCa) and are present in about 90% of cases of advanced disease. Consequently, an adequate management of bone involvement is of pivotal importance in the therapeutic approach and skeletal-related events (SREs) need to be closely monitored and promptly assessed and treated. Bone targeting agents (BTAs), consisting in bisphosphonates and denosumab, are an essential part of the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer that accompanies systemic treatments throughout the most part of the history of the disease. Activity and safety of bone targeting agents: These treatments are correlated to better outcomes in terms of reduction of SREs and, in metastatic castration resistant setting, of increased overall survival (OS), but several important adverse events have to be managed and prevented. Of these, osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) is extremely invalidating and should be managed with a special attention. Discussion: The role of BTAs in prostate cancer is pivotal throughout many stages of the disease, but several toxicities should be quickly recognized and treated. We aim at recollecting evidence on clinical benefit of BTAs, common and specific toxicities, and explore the pathophysiology and clinical aspects of osteonecrosis of the jaw. We present a review of the literature to report the role of the different types of bone targeting agents in the management of prostate cancer with bone metastases with a particular focus on common toxicities and ONJ to recollect current evidences on the activity of these compounds and the correct management of their adverse events. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
26 pages, 2912 KiB  
Review
Current Overview of Treatment for Metastatic Bone Disease
by Shinji Tsukamoto, Akira Kido, Yasuhito Tanaka, Giancarlo Facchini, Giuliano Peta, Giuseppe Rossi and Andreas F. Mavrogenis
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(5), 3347-3372; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol28050290 - 29 Aug 2021
Cited by 51 | Viewed by 11250
Abstract
The number of patients with bone metastasis increases as medical management and surgery improve the overall survival of patients with cancer. Bone metastasis can cause skeletal complications, including bone pain, pathological fractures, spinal cord or nerve root compression, and hypercalcemia. Before initiation of [...] Read more.
The number of patients with bone metastasis increases as medical management and surgery improve the overall survival of patients with cancer. Bone metastasis can cause skeletal complications, including bone pain, pathological fractures, spinal cord or nerve root compression, and hypercalcemia. Before initiation of treatment for bone metastasis, it is important to exclude primary bone malignancy, which would require a completely different therapeutic approach. It is essential to select surgical methods considering the patient’s prognosis, quality of life, postoperative function, and risk of postoperative complications. Therefore, bone metastasis treatment requires a multidisciplinary team approach, including radiologists, oncologists, and orthopedic surgeons. Recently, many novel palliative treatment options have emerged for bone metastases, such as stereotactic body radiation therapy, radiopharmaceuticals, vertebroplasty, minimally invasive spine stabilization with percutaneous pedicle screws, acetabuloplasty, embolization, thermal ablation techniques, electrochemotherapy, and high-intensity focused ultrasound. These techniques are beneficial for patients who may not benefit from surgery or radiotherapy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

14 pages, 1251 KiB  
Systematic Review
The Prediction of Survival after Surgical Management of Bone Metastases of the Extremities—A Comparison of Prognostic Models
by Ofir Ben Gal, Terrence Chi Fang Soh, Sarah Vaughan, Viswanath Jayasanker, Ashish Mahendra and Sanjay Gupta
Curr. Oncol. 2022, 29(7), 4703-4716; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol29070373 - 06 Jul 2022
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1969
Abstract
Individualized survival prognostic models for symptomatic patients with appendicular metastatic bone disease are key to guiding clinical decision-making for the orthopedic surgeon. Several prognostic models have been developed in recent years; however, most orthopedic surgeons have not incorporated these models into routine practice. [...] Read more.
Individualized survival prognostic models for symptomatic patients with appendicular metastatic bone disease are key to guiding clinical decision-making for the orthopedic surgeon. Several prognostic models have been developed in recent years; however, most orthopedic surgeons have not incorporated these models into routine practice. This is possibly due to uncertainty concerning their accuracy and the lack of comparison publications and recommendations. Our aim was to conduct a review and quality assessment of these models. A computerized literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed up to February 2022 was done, using keywords: “Bone metastasis”, “survival”, “extremity” and “prognosis”. We evaluated each model’s performance, assessing the estimated discriminative power and calibration accuracy for the analyzed patients. We included 11 studies out of the 1779 citations initially retrieved. The 11 studies included seven different models for estimating survival. Among externally validated survival prediction scores, PATHFx 3.0, 2013-SPRING and potentially Optimodel were found to be the best models in terms of performance. Currently, it is still a challenge to recommend any of the models as the standard for predicting survival for these patients. However, some models show better performance status and other quality characteristics. We recommend future, large, multicenter, prospective studies to compare between PATHfx 3.0, SPRING 2013 and OptiModel using the same external validation dataset. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 954 KiB  
Commentary
The Surgical Management of Proximal Femoral Metastases: A Narrative Review
by Daniel Axelrod, Aaron M. Gazendam and Michelle Ghert
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(5), 3748-3757; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol28050320 - 28 Sep 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 3499
Abstract
The proximal femur is a common location for the development of bony metastatic disease. Metastatic bone disease in this location can cause debilitating pain, pathologic fractures, reduced quality of life, anemia or hypercalcemia. A thorough history, physical examination and preoperative investigations are required [...] Read more.
The proximal femur is a common location for the development of bony metastatic disease. Metastatic bone disease in this location can cause debilitating pain, pathologic fractures, reduced quality of life, anemia or hypercalcemia. A thorough history, physical examination and preoperative investigations are required to ensure accurate diagnosis and prognosis. The goals of surgical management is to provide pain relief and return to function with a construct that provides stability to allow for immediate weightbearing. Current surgical treatment options include intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty and endoprosthetic reconstructions. Oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma must be given special consideration as tumor resection and reconstruction has survival benefit. Both tumor and patient characteristics must be taken into account before deciding on the appropriate surgical intervention. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 2305 KiB  
Commentary
Emerging Concepts in the Surgical Management of Peri-Acetabular Metastatic Bone Disease
by Aaron Gazendam, Daniel Axelrod, David Wilson and Michelle Ghert
Curr. Oncol. 2021, 28(4), 2731-2740; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/curroncol28040238 - 17 Jul 2021
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 3258
Abstract
The pelvis is a common site of metastatic bone disease. Peri-acetabular lesions are particularly challenging and can cause severe pain, disability and pathologic fractures. Surgical management of these lesions has historically consisted of cementoplasty for contained lesions and Harrington reconstructions for larger, more [...] Read more.
The pelvis is a common site of metastatic bone disease. Peri-acetabular lesions are particularly challenging and can cause severe pain, disability and pathologic fractures. Surgical management of these lesions has historically consisted of cementoplasty for contained lesions and Harrington reconstructions for larger, more destructive lesions. Due to the limitations of these procedures, a number of novel procedures have been developed to manage this challenging problem. Percutaneous techniques—including acetabular screw fixation and cementoplasty augmented with screws—have been developed to minimize surgical morbidity. Recent literature has demonstrated a reliable reduction in pain and improvement in function in appropriately selected patients. Several adjuncts to the Harrington procedure have been utilized in recent years to reduce complication rates. The use of constrained liners and dual mobility bearings have reduced the historically high dislocation rates. Cage constructs and porous tantalum implants are becoming increasingly common in the management of large bony defects and destructive lesions. With novel and evolving surgical techniques, surgeons are presented with a variety of surgical options to manage this challenging condition. Physicians must take into account the patients’ overall health status, oncologic prognosis and anatomic location and extent of disease when developing an appropriate surgical plan. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Treatment of Bone Metastasis)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-13
Back to TopTop