0
Articles   |    
Functional and Oncological Outcome of Acetabular Reconstruction for the Treatment of Metastatic Disease*
Rex A. W. Marco, M.D.†; Dhiren S. Sheth, M.D.‡; Patrick J. Boland, M.D.§; Jay S. Wunder, M.D.#; Jeffrey A. Siegel, M.D.**; John H. Healey, M.D.§
View Disclosures and Other Information
Investigation performed at the Orthopaedic Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Affiliated with the Weill College of Medicine at Cornell University, New York, N.Y.
*One or more of the authors has received or will receive benefits for personal or professional use from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article. Funds were received in total or partial support of the research or clinical study presented in the article. The funding sources were the American Cancer Society Clinical Oncology Fellowship Award 93-164-1 and the New York Marathon Limb Preservation Fund.
†University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77449.
‡University of Texas at Houston, 6431 Fannin Street, M.S.B. 6.149, Houston, Texas 77030.
§Orthopaedic Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, Suite A675, New York, N.Y. 10021. E-mail address for J. H. Healey: healeyj@mskcc.org.
#University Musculoskeletal Oncology Unit, Mt. Sinai Hospital, 600 University Avenue, Suite 476, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X5, Canada.
**Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York 11040.

The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2000; 82:642-642 
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Metastatic disease of the acetabulum can be painful and disabling. Operative intervention is indicated for patients who fail to respond adequately to nonoperative treatment. We evaluated the functional and oncological outcome of acetabular reconstruction after curettage for the treatment of refractory symptomatic acetabular metastases.

Methods: Fifty-five patients with metastatic disease of the acetabulum were treated with operative acetabular reconstruction combined with a total hip replacement. The most common primary tumor was carcinoma of the breast (eighteen patients), followed by carcinoma of the kidney (seven patients) and carcinoma of the prostate (seven patients). Forty (73 percent) of the patients presented with multiple skeletal metastases, and eighteen (33 percent) had associated visceral metastases. Twenty-eight (51 percent) had severe pain requiring continuous use of narcotics, twenty-four (44 percent) had moderate pain requiring periodic use of narcotics, and the remaining three (5 percent) had mild pain requiring use of non-narcotic analgesics. Eighteen (33 percent) of the patients could not walk, twenty-three (42 percent) needed a walker or crutches, twelve (22 percent) used a single cane, and two (4 percent) walked without assistive devices. Intralesional curettage of the tumor was performed in all of the patients. Fifty-four of the hips were reconstructed with a protrusio cup and one, with a hemipelvis endoprosthesis. Large defects were reinforced with cement and pin or screw fixation (the modified Harrington technique), which allowed transmission of weight-bearing forces to the remaining intact pelvis. Thirty-six acetabular reconstructions were performed with antegrade pins or cannulated screws; fifteen, with long retrograde screws; and four, with cement.

Results: The median period of survival was nine months. Patients with visceral metastases had a median period of survival of three months compared with twelve months for patients without visceral metastases (p < 0.001). Patients with breast cancer presented later in the disease process (p < 0.004) and lived longer than did those with other carcinomas (p < 0.004). Forty-five patients were evaluated three months after reconstruction. Thirty-four (76 percent) of them had relief of pain as determined by decreased use of narcotics. Nine of the eighteen patients who could not walk preoperatively regained the ability to walk. Fourteen of the seventeen patients who originally were able to walk in the community retained that ability. Thirty-three patients were available for evaluation at six months. Twenty-five (76 percent) still had relief of pain, and nineteen (58 percent) were able to walk and function in the community. Overall, fourteen (25 percent) of the fifty-five patients had moderate local progression of the disease, and five of these patients had failure of the fixation. Fourteen early complications developed in twelve (22 percent) of the patients. One patient (2 percent) died perioperatively.

Conclusions: Patients who have acetabular metastases that are refractory to radiation and chemotherapy have a short life expectancy. The early, gratifying results of reconstruction validate the role of operative treatment as a short-term palliative procedure. Protrusio acetabular cups presumably compensate for deficiencies of the medial wall, while cement and pin fixation can be used effectively to reconstruct large defects in the acetabular column and dome. The low rate of fixation failure supports the biomechanical principles of the reconstruction. Generally, the reconstructions are sufficiently durable to exceed the life expectancy of the patients.

Figures in this Article
    We evaluated the oncological and functional outcome of operative treatment of periacetabular metastases. Pelvic and periacetabular metastases occur frequently in patients with cancer. Some of those metastatic deposits are associated with disruption and mechanical instability of the acetabulum, which may cause severe pain that is increased by walking or motion of the hip. An effective method of treatment should relieve the pain and restore function for as long as possible. Correction of mechanical instability can restore or preserve walking ability and help to maintain the independence and comfort of the patient during the last months of life. Operative treatment should enhance the patient's quality of life.
    At our institution, many patients present with disruption and mechanical instability of the acetabulum secondary to metastatic disease. Nonoperative management with protected weight-bearing and analgesics is initially recommended. Anti-neoplastic treatment consisting of radiation therapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or hormonal manipulation is initiated or continued, as appropriate. Operative treatment is recommended if (1) acute symptoms do not abate after a combination of protected weight-bearing, administration of analgesics, and anti-neoplastic treatment; (2) restoration of satisfactory function with control of pain is not achieved within one to three months following radiation therapy; or (3) an ipsilateral fracture or an impending fracture of the femur requires operative treatment.
    Harrington suggested a method of classifying metastatic acetabular lesions and described an excellent method to reconstruct the hip in the presence of extensive periacetabular destruction4. Although his results were encouraging, we are unaware of any subsequent large published series that substantiate his findings14. Our report examines these issues in a large cohort of patients, presents an anatomically based classification, and describes techniques that may make pelvic reconstruction easier and safer in patients with periacetabular metastases.
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 1:Diagram demonstrating the triangulation guide used to place pelvic-acetabular pins and screws accurately and safely in an antegrade fashion. (See the Materials and Methods section of the article for the details of this operative technique.)
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-A:Figs. 2-A, 2-B, and 2-C: A patient who had a metastatic lesion involving the right acetabulum.
    Fig. 2-A: Pelvic radiograph demonstrating the metastatic lesion with a pathological fracture of the medial acetabular wall (large arrow). There is medial displacement of the acetabular fracture and a protrusio deformity. Discontinuity is also noted in the subchondral bone line of the superior acetabular dome (small arrows), demonstrating destruction of the bone in this area by the cancer.
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-B:Computerized tomography scan showing involvement of the posterior and anterior columns by the metastatic lesion. It is difficult to appreciate this fully on the plain radiograph. This image also identifies the fracture and demonstrates the extension of the lesion outside the confines of the bone (arrow).
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-C:Radiograph showing the acetabular reconstruction with 170-millimeter cannulated screws to reinforce the columns. The dome was augmented with cement. A protrusio ring (Healey Revision Cup; Biomet) was used to replace the deficient medial wall. The cup was placed laterally in relation to the original acetabulum, and the flange was used to prevent medial migration of the cup.
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 3:Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves, including 95 percent confidence intervals, for patients who had metastatic disease, with and without visceral metastases. Comparison of the two curves demonstrates the significant negative influence of visceral metastasis on survival (p < 0.001).
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 4:Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves, including 95 percent confidence intervals, for patients with metastatic breast carcinoma and for patients with any other type of metastatic carcinoma. Comparison of the two curves demonstrates the difference in survival between these two groups, with patients with metastatic breast carcinoma surviving significantly longer than those with any other type of metastatic cancer (p < 0.004).
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-A:Figs. 5-A, 5-B, and 5-C: A patient who had prostate cancer that metastasized to involve the anterior column, medial wall, and superior dome of the right acetabulum.
    Fig. 5-A: Preoperative radiograph demonstrating the large lytic lesion involving the acetabulum (arrow).
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-B: Postoperative radiograph illustrating the reconstruction with antegrade pin reinforcement of the acetabular dome and a cemented protrusio cup.
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-C:Follow-up radiograph showing local progression of the disease, between eight and nine months postoperatively, causing progression of the pelvic osteolysis. This resulted in a failure of fixation with fracture of the cement and shifting of the implant into a vertical position. The patient returned to his preoperative level of function (wheelchair-bound) at this point; however, he still had a reduction in pain compared with the preoperative status. With current reconstructive techniques, longer pins would have been used to engage both the anterior and the posterior column; the pins would have been placed medial to the weight-bearing axis of the socket to act as a buttress and to prevent the development of a protrusion deformity.
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable I:  Distribution of Primary Cancer
    Primary SiteNo. of Patients
    Breast18 (33%)
    Kidney  7 (13%)
    Prostate  7 (13%)
    Multiple myeloma  5
    Lung  4
    Bladder  4
    Leiomyosarcoma  2
    Melanoma  2
    Thyroid  2
    Colon  1
    Esophagus  1
    Pheochromocytoma  1
    Unknown  1
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable II:  Preoperative Performance Status According to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Scale6
    ValueDescriptionNo. of Patients
    0Normal activity  3
    1Symptoms, but nearly full ability to walk12
    2Some bed time, but needs to be in bed <50 percent of time15
    3Bedridden 50 percent of daytime16
    4Totally bedridden  9
     
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable III:  Bone Integrity and Acetabular Reconstruction
    *The values are given as the number of patients, with the number of modified Harrington reconstructions in parentheses.
    Anatomical LocationSufficient*  Insufficient*
    Anterior column35 (2)20 (6)
    Posterior column28 (4)  27 (17)
    Dome  8 (5)  47 (42)
    Medial wall13 (0)  42 (11)
    Fifty-five patients who had symptomatic metastatic acetabular disease with structural insufficiency were treated with operative reconstruction of the acetabulum in combination with a total hip replacement from June 1988 to June 1998.

    Demographics

    The mean age (and standard deviation) of the patients at the time of presentation was 62 ± 13 years (range, thirty-four to eighty-two years). There were thirty-one female and twenty-four male patients. The most common primary tumor was carcinoma of the breast (eighteen patients) (Table I). The median time from the diagnosis of the primary cancer to the manifestation of the acetabular disease was twenty-four months (range, zero to 283 months). The mean time to presentation of acetabular metastases in patients with breast carcinoma (ninety-one months; range, three to 283 months) was longer than that in patients with the other types of carcinoma (thirty-three months; range, zero to 192 months). This difference was significant according to the two-tailed, independent Student t test (p < 0.004).

    Preoperative Functional Status

    The preoperative condition of the patients was evaluated on the basis of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status6, hematocrit, serum albumin level, serum calcium level, technetium-99 methylene diphosphonate scintigraphic findings, and the presence of visceral metastases. The ECOG performance status scale is commonly used to quantify the functional status of patients with cancer, to determine eligibility for clinical trials, and to predict survival2,7,10,11,13. The interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the ECOG performance status has been validated in several studies7,11. There is also a relationship between duration of survival and the other parameters mentioned earlier1,3,5,9,15,16.
    The ECOG performance status was assessed on the basis of clinical or admission notes (Table II). Forty (73 percent) of the fifty-five patients were too sick to have been considered for most investigational chemotherapy protocols at our institution because they had an ECOG value of more than 1.
    Thirty-five patients were anemic at the time of presentation. Thirteen of these patients had moderate-to-severe anemia (a hematocrit of less than 30 percent). The mean serum albumin level was 3.9 ± 0.6 grams per deciliter (39 ± 6 grams per liter). Twenty-five patients had an albumin level of less than 4.0 grams per deciliter (forty grams per liter). The mean serum calcium level was 9.8 ± 1.2 milligrams per deciliter (2.45 ± 0.30 millimoles per liter). Three patients presented with hypercalcemia. Forty (73 percent) of the patients had multiple skeletal metastases as seen on bone scans. Disease was confined to the hemipelvis in the remaining fifteen patients (27 percent). Eighteen patients (33 percent) had known visceral metastases, and four of them had multiple visceral metastases. The lung was the most common site of visceral involvement (fourteen patients). Other metastatic sites included the liver, the adrenal gland, the contralateral kidney, and the brain.

    Preoperative Pain and Walking Status

    All fifty-five patients were incapacitated by hip pain. Twenty-eight (51 percent) had severe pain requiring continuous use of narcotic analgesics, twenty-four (44 percent) had moderate pain requiring daily but periodic use of narcotic analgesics, and the remaining three (5 percent) had mild pain requiring use of non-narcotic analgesics.
    Eighteen (33 percent) of the patients were unable to walk. Twenty could walk in their home, and seventeen could walk in the community. Twenty-three (42 percent) used a walker or crutches, twelve (22 percent) used a single cane, and two (4 percent) walked without assistive devices.

    Preoperative Radiation and Chemotherapy

    Thirty-one (56 percent) of the patients received radiation to the involved acetabulum prior to operative intervention. The mean dose of radiation was 3400 960 centigray. Forty-five patients (82 percent) received systemic chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, or immunotherapy. Fifty-three patients (96 percent) received either chemotherapy or radiation therapy preoperatively. All of the patients remained seriously symptomatic at the time of presentation to the orthopaedic oncology service.

    Anatomical Pathology

    The extent of acetabular disease was evaluated preoperatively with plain radiographs for all fifty-five patients, with computerized tomography scans for thirty-eight patients, and with magnetic resonance imaging scans for fourteen patients. Three-dimensional imaging of the acetabulum was performed when the integrity of the anterior and posterior columns could not be adequately assessed with plain radiography. Computerized tomography was the study of choice to evaluate bone integrity.
    The extent of the acetabular defect was evaluated with preoperative radiographs and on the basis of the intraoperative findings. The anterior and posterior columns, superior dome, and medial wall were assessed separately for structural compromise and were then classified as sufficient or insufficient. Sufficient bone provided adequate support for the acetabular component, while insufficient bone did not. Fractures of the anatomical regions as well as segmental and cavitary defects were classified as insufficient bone. This system was based on both anatomical and reconstruction considerations. Both the anterior and the posterior column were insufficient in ten (18 percent) of the patients, whereas either the anterior or the posterior column was insufficient in thirty-six (65 percent). Forty-two patients had an insufficient medial wall and an insufficient column or dome.
    Twenty-nine patients also had a radiographically visible lesion in the ipsilateral femur. Eighteen of them had a lesion in the femoral head or neck, and the other eleven had a lesion in the femoral shaft.
    Forty-seven patients had an acetabular fracture, and the remaining eight had an acetabular fracture associated with a fracture of the proximal aspect of the femur.

    Embolization

    Selective arterial embolization was performed in twelve patients: four with renal-cell carcinoma, two with thyroid carcinoma, two with lytic carcinoma of the breast, and one each with multiple myeloma, leiomyosarcoma, esophageal carcinoma, and pheochromocytoma.

    Operative Reconstruction

    One patient received a hemipelvis endoprosthesis. Fifty-four patients received a cemented total hip replacement: three had a reconstruction with a protrusio acetabular cup, fifteen had a modified Harrington reconstruction with a protrusio acetabular cup and long retrograde screws, and thirty-six had a modified Harrington reconstruction with a protrusio acetabular cup and antegrade pins or cannulated screws.

    Technique of Periacetabular Reconstruction

    The patient was placed in a true lateral decubitus position6 to assist with proper orientation of the acetabular component. Slight flexion of the table at the patient's waist facilitated subsequent placement of the antegrade pin or cannulated screw within the iliac crest. The entire extremity, iliac crest, and flank were prepared and draped. The hip was exposed through an extensive posterolateral approach, which provided optimal acetabular exposure. Soft tissues around extensive acetabular lesions were carefully retracted with a hand-held long, narrow, smooth, right-angle retractor rather than with typical spiked retractors that could puncture the tumor pseudocapsule or disrupt the only remaining intact acetabular column. This avoided uncontrolled bleeding or soft-tissue injury early in the procedure. All gross tumor was then removed by curettage. Bleeding was often profuse at this time, but it subsided after the tumor was removed and the socket was packed with sponges. Structurally intact bone was preserved. Cortical bone was preserved to maintain the anatomical landmarks that help to guide insertion of the cup and also to increase structural support for the cup.
    If an antegrade modified Harrington reconstruction was indicated, then the anterior or posterior portion of the iliac crest was exposed through a separate incision measuring approximately six to eight centimeters in length. The incision was made parallel to the iliac crest, and the crest was then subperiosteally exposed. The insertion sites for the iliac crest pins were prepared prior to curettage of the tumor in patients with vascular tumors to minimize the time during which tumor bleeding occurred. Use of a triangulation guide assisted proper antegrade pin or cannulated screw placement within the iliac wing (Fig. 1). An entry site near the inner one-third of the crest was used to prevent pins from cutting through the outer pelvic table. Smooth or threaded one-quarter-inch (0.64-centimeter) Steinmann pins or cannulated 6.5-millimeter screws were used. The goal of pin or screw placement was to reinforce deficiencies in the dome, medial wall, or columns (Table III).
    Pins or screws in the anterior iliac crest were aimed posteriorly toward the ischium to reinforce deficiencies of the posterior column, whereas those in the posterior iliac crest were aimed anteriorly toward the pubis to reconstruct insufficiencies of the anterior column. Pins were inserted to the desired depth, cut to the appropriate length, and impacted within the iliac crest. Impaction helps to prevent protrusion of the pins, which causes local pain and discomfort. Pins or screws were placed at least one centimeter apart along the iliac crest. Typically, two pins or screws in the anterior iliac crest and two in the posterior iliac crest were easily placed when necessary.
    Defects of the superior dome were reconstructed with antegrade or retrograde pins or screws. Incisions in both the anterior and the posterior iliac crest were used to place antegrade pins or screws in the superior dome. Broad pin or screw placement in the superior dome created a pedestal that provided additional cup support. A pedestal located superomedial to the acetabular component transmitted weight-bearing forces across the acetabulum to healthier areas. Large defects of the superior dome were further supported by long (sixty to 100-millimeter) 6.5-millimeter-diameter screws inserted retrograde through the cup into the exposed innominate bone or embedded in cement.
    Insufficiencies of the medial acetabular wall were reconstructed with a flanged acetabular cup (Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana) in thirty-five (83 percent) of the forty-two patients with medial wall deficiencies. The flange was placed over the most intact part of the remaining rim of the acetabulum to improve anchorage of the cup. The superolateral part of the rim was usually chosen. This position lateralized the cup so that it did not impinge on the acetabular pins or screws. Accurate orientation of the cup was often difficult when there was loss of cortical and acetabular rim bone. Cups were inserted in 40 to 55 degrees of horizontal inclination. Notching the acetabular rim allowed the flange of the protrusio cup to fit better, thus avoiding excessive vertical placement of the cup. Supplemental fixation screws were placed through the dome and the flange of the cup to secure the component better and to integrate it with the cement within the defect in the superior dome. Dome screws were placed before flange screws were inserted, to prevent the cup from cantilevering on the acetabular rim and dislodging the component (Figs. 2-A, 2-B, and 2-C).
    The flanged cup was used in a total of forty-six patients. Insufficiency was noted in both the medial wall and the superior dome in thirty patients, in the superior dome only in nine, and in the medial wall only in six. One patient had sufficient bone in both the superior dome and the medial wall. The flange on the cup prevents protrusio, and the multiple holes within the cup add stability to the construct by allowing cement interdigitation or screw placement into the dome or flange for additional fixation of the cup and reinforcement of the superior dome.
    Cementing on the acetabular side was performed in two stages in patients with large defects and a deficient inner table. During the first stage, the defect was filled entirely with cement and the pins or screws were incorporated into the cement. An acetabular cup was then cemented over this construct. Attempts to simultaneously fill the defect and cement the cup led to incomplete filling of large defects. Additionally, pressurization in the presence of a medial defect can dangerously force cement into the pelvis. A one-stage cementing technique was used for smaller defects with an intact inner table.
    The femoral side was reconstructed with a standard-stem-length prosthesis in nineteen patients and with a long-stem prosthesis (220 to 300 millimeters) in thirty-six patients. All long-stem prostheses were cemented after the femur was vented to prevent fat, tumor, and cement embolization8.

    Postoperative Treatment

    Eighteen patients received postoperative radiotherapy. The mean dose was 2900 620 centigray. Forty-one patients (75 percent) received postoperative chemotherapy. Overall, fifty-four patients received chemotherapy or radiation therapy either preoperatively or postoperatively. Forty-seven patients received chemotherapy and radiation therapy, five received chemotherapy only, and two received radiation therapy only.
    Below-the-knee compression boots were used intraoperatively and until the patient could walk. Prophylactic chemical anticoagulation was not used routinely. The patients began walking one to four days postoperatively depending on their general condition. They were instructed to bear weight as tolerated.

    Statistical Analysis

    Differences in the means of continuous data were tested with the Student t test. Survival data was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method of estimating survival distribution. The log-rank test was used to compare survival distributions. The Fisher exact test was used to compare survival and functional status of patients in the present study with those of patients in other studies4,14. Formal Kaplan-Meier survival distributions and comparisons could not be performed between studies with the data available. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. All statistical analyses were performed on a personal computer with the statistical package SPSS for Windows (version 10.0; SPSS, Chicago, Illinois).

    Operative Time, Estimated Blood Loss, and Duration of Hospital Stay

    The mean operative time was 290 ± 72 minutes. The mean estimated blood loss was 2200 ± 1100 milliliters. Two of the patients had excessive intraoperative bleeding (14,000 and 8000 milliliters). One of these patients had renal-cell carcinoma, and the other had a lytic carcinoma of the breast. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 24 ± 11 days.

    Postoperative Complications

    There were fourteen early postoperative complications in twelve patients (22 percent). One patient died perioperatively (less than one month after the procedure) from seizure activity secondary to brain metastases and uncontrolled hyponatremia. The other complications included five deep-vein thromboses, three superficial wound infections, one mild disseminated intravascular coagulation-like coagulopathy, one sacral decubitus ulcer, one wound hematoma, one colonic pseudo-obstruction (Ogilvie syndrome), and one hip subluxation requiring revision of the acetabular component. None of the patients had a deep infection.
    There were five late fixation failures due to progression of disease and one prominent pin in the iliac wing in a thin patient. The mean time to failure was 12 ± 7 months (median, eleven months). Four of these patients had to have one or more of the pins removed from the iliac wing. One patient underwent a revision to a bipolar hemiarthroplasty because of progressive protrusio acetabuli. One patient remained asymptomatic and thus did not require further intervention.

    Survival and Progression of the Disease

    Forty-four patients (80 percent) had died by the time of this writing. The cause of death of the majority of the patients was systemic progression of the disease. Twenty-three of these patients had survived for more than twelve months postoperatively. At the time of this writing, six patients were alive with less than two years of follow-up (mean, 16 ± 2.8 months; median, sixteen months). All of these patients survived longer than the overall median period of survival of nine months as determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis (95 percent confidence interval, 5.9 to twelve months; mean, eighteen months). Overall, ten patients were alive at the time of this writing (mean period of survival, twenty-eight months; median, nineteen months; range, twelve to seventy-three months) and one was censored as alive at the time of the most recent follow-up. In the entire series, only seven patients survived for more than two years: four were still alive at the time of this writing, two had died, and one was lost to follow-up.
    The median period of survival of the patients with visceral metastases was three months (95 percent confidence interval, 0.9 to 5.1 months; mean, 5.7 months), whereas that of the patients without visceral metastases was twelve months (95 percent confidence interval, 7.3 to seventeen months; mean, twenty-five months) (Fig. 3). This difference was significant according to log-rank analysis (p < 0.001). Patients with breast cancer had a median period of survival of nineteen months (95 percent confidence interval, 4.6 to thirty-three months; mean, twenty-two months) compared with a median period of 6.3 months (95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to eleven months; mean, 9.4 months) for patients with other carcinomas (p < 0.004) (Fig. 4).
    Patients with a poor performance status (an ECOG status of more than 1) had a shorter period of survival (median, seven months; 95 percent confidence interval, 4.1 to 9.9 months; mean, sixteen months) compared with patients with a good performance status (an ECOG status of 0 or 1) (median, fifteen months; 95 percent confidence interval, twelve to eighteen months; mean, twenty-one months.)
    Fourteen patients (25 percent) had moderate local progression of disease. Five of these patients had fixation failure with progressive migration of the cup and subsequent pin protrusion. Thus, in nine patients, fixation of the implant was maintained despite progressive local disease (Figs. 5-A, 5-B, and 5-C). Remarkably, forty of fifty-four patients who survived more than one month had radiographic evidence of local control of the tumor despite progression of the disease systemically.

    Functional Results

    At Three Months

    Functional evaluation was performed during postoperative clinic visits. Pain, walking, and the use of assistive devices were assessed.
    Forty-five patients were available for follow-up at three months (eight had died, and two were lost to follow-up). Five patients (11 percent) continued to have severe hip pain requiring continuous use of narcotic medication, eleven (24 percent) had moderate pain requiring oral narcotic analgesics, eighteen (40 percent) had mild pain requiring occasional non-narcotic analgesics, and eleven had no pain. Overall, thirty-four patients (76 percent) had less pain compared with preoperative levels as determined by decreased use of narcotics. Eight patients had the same level of pain, whereas three had worse pain.
    Six patients were unable to walk, fourteen could walk only in their home, and twenty-five could walk and function in the community. Thirty of the thirty-two patients who could walk preoperatively retained that ability postoperatively. Eleven of them had decreased use of assistive devices, fourteen maintained the same requirements, and five had increased use of assistive devices. Of the thirteen patients who could not walk preoperatively, nine regained the ability postoperatively (two without the use of assistive devices, two with a cane, and five with a walker) and the other four were still unable to walk.

    At Six Months and Beyond

    Thirty-three patients were available for follow-up (nineteen had died, and three were lost to follow-up) at six months. Twenty-five (76 percent) still had less pain than they had had preoperatively, three (9 percent) had the same level of pain as they had had preoperatively, and five (15 percent) had increased pain. Nineteen (58 percent) maintained the ability to walk and function in the community. Of the nine patients who had regained the ability to walk after acetabular reconstruction, all remained alive and six maintained the ability to either walk in their home or to walk and function in the community.
    Twenty-one patients had more than twelve months of follow-up (thirty-two had died, and two were lost to follow-up). Fourteen (67 percent) still had decreased pain, and twelve (57 percent) maintained the ability to walk and function in the community.
    Of the fifty-five patients, seven had more than two years of follow-up (forty-one had died, one was lost to follow-up, and six were alive with less than two years of follow-up). Six maintained pain relief, while five maintained the ability to walk and function in the community.
    Acetabular reconstruction in patients with metastatic disease is an oncological and reconstructive challenge. The overall outcome in the current series of patients was satisfactory. The present study differs from earlier reports on survival and late functional outcome after acetabular reconstruction in patients with metastatic disease4,14.
    Harrington reported that thirty (52 percent) of fifty-eight patients survived for two years after operative treatment4. In contrast, only seven (13 percent) of fifty-five patients survived for two years in the present study. This difference in survival is significant according to chi-square analysis (p < 0.003), even after assuming the worst possible two-year survival rate (thirty alive and twenty-eight dead) in the Harrington study and the best possible two-year survival rate (fourteen alive and forty-one dead) in the present study.
    The difference in survival may be due to differences in the patient populations and the indications for operative treatment. Harrington treated patients on the basis of the presence of metastasis and the patient's life expectancy rather than using the currently reported approach, which was based on the degree of acetabular involvement by the metastases and the amount of pain produced by walking. The process used by Harrington resulted in the selection of patients whose life expectancy was longer than that of the patients in the current study.
    In our study, any patient with both symptomatic acetabular metastases that were refractory to nonoperative intervention and a life expectancy of more than three months was a candidate for operative treatment. Additionally, eighteen patients (33 percent) in the current study had visceral metastases, which were associated with a reduced median period of survival (p < 0.001) and may have contributed to the difference in survival between studies. Poor preoperative performance status was also associated with a reduced median period of survival. The large number of patients (forty of fifty-five) with a poor preoperative performance status in the current study may also explain the difference in survival between the two studies.
    Pain relief, ability to walk, and use of an assistive device were analyzed to evaluate functional outcome. Seventy-six percent of our patients (twenty-five of the thirty-three who were alive at six months) had satisfactory pain relief. These results are similar to the pain relief reported by several authors who performed reconstructive procedures in patients with metastatic acetabular disease4,12,14. On the other hand, only nineteen of thirty-three patients in our study maintained the ability to walk and function in the community six months after the reconstruction, whereas Harrington reported that thirty-nine of fifty-one patients maintained these abilities (p < 0.037). Patient selection may have contributed to this difference. The current study included patients with shorter life expectancies and more patients with combined medial wall and superior dome or column defects (forty-two of fifty-five) compared with Harrington's study (twenty-five of fifty-eight) (p < 0.001). The optimal time to evaluate the outcome of this procedure is debatable, particularly because of the presence of other sites of disease and the short life expectancy of the patients. It is notable that there were similar rates of pain relief and maintenance of function among surviving patients at each of the time-points chosen (three, six, twelve, and twenty-four months).
    Although the oncological and functional results of the present study differ from those of previous reports, we believe that acetabular reconstruction provides worthwhile palliative care for patients with disabling metastatic acetabular disease. The magnitude of the operation, however, requires judicious use of this procedure. Most patients respond to nonoperative measures. Only a few patients have major structural deficiencies that require operative treatment. Preselection of patients with minimal disease may lead to longer periods of survival after reconstruction but will subject many patients to the risk, expense, and inconvenience of operative treatment that is perhaps unnecessary. On the other hand, not treating patients with disabling metastatic acetabular disease denies many of them a better quality of life during their remaining few months.
    We suggest modifying the Harrington system of evaluation of metastatic disease of the acetabulum4. Although the Harrington classification identifies overall structural compromise, the system described in our report defines structural deficiencies of the acetabulum anatomically. Column and superior dome deficiencies were effectively reconstructed with use of the remaining intact bone to anchor the implants and to transmit forces to stronger bone. Medial wall deficiencies were successfully treated with reconstruction with a protrusio cup.
    The Harrington operative technique was modified to aid placement of pins or cannulated screws within the remaining intact bone. A triangulation guide facilitated antegrade placement of pins or cannulated screws. They could be placed accurately, rapidly, and safely, optimizing the reconstruction. Another modification was the use of retrograde long-screw fixation in an attempt to anchor the cement and cup to intact bone.
    The results of the current series support Harrington's findings4, and they endorse the concept of reconstructing pathological fractures of the acetabulum by transmitting forces to stronger proximal pelvic bone. Although fourteen patients (25 percent) had local disease progression, only five of them had fixation failure (Figs. 5-A, 5-B, and 5-C). They had bone resorption and loss of fixation of the devices to the underlying bone. The disease progressed in patients in whom the tumors did not respond to chemotherapy, radiation, or intralesional excision. Proliferation of residual cancer can weaken the construct, contribute to implant migration, and result in deterioration of the patient's functional status. The reconstruction can be no better than the quality of the underlying bone. It is unknown whether patients who do not respond to local radiation or systemic chemotherapy or hormone therapy would benefit from a tumor excision that is more extensive than the incisional curettage used in our series. However, few patients with acetabular disease are candidates for wide excision because of their short life expectancy and widespread metastatic disease. The intralesional excision of the tumor and the reconstruction of the acetabulum described in this report helped most patients.
    Coleman, R. E., and Rubens, R. D.: The clinical course of bone metastases from breast cancer. British J. Cancer,55: 61-66, 1987.5561  1987 
     
    Conill, C.; Verger, E.; and Salamero, M.: Performance status assessment in cancer patients. Cancer,65: 1864-1866, 1990.651864  1990  [PubMed]
     
    Dunphy, F. R.; Spitzer, G.; Fornoff, J. E.; Yau, J. C.; Huan, S. D.; Dicke, K. A.; Buzdar, A. U.; and Hortobagyi, G. N.: Factors predicting long-term survival for metastatic breast cancer patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and bone marrow support. Cancer,73: 2157-2167, 1994.732157  1994  [PubMed]
     
    Harrington, K. D.: The management of acetabular insufficiency secondary to metastatic malignant disease. J Bone Joint Surg,63-A: 653-664, April 1981..63-A653  1981. 
     
    Matzkin, H.; Perito, P. E.; and Soloway, M. S.: Prognostic factors in metastatic prostate cancer. Cancer,72: 3788-3792, 1993.723788  1993  [PubMed]
     
    Nercessian, O. A., and Joshi, R. P.: General principles of surgical technique. In The Hip, pp. 951-958. Edited by J. J. Callaghan, A. G. Rosenberg, and H. E. Rubash. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven, 1998. 
     
    Orr, S. T., and Aisner, S.: Performance status assessment among oncology patients: a review. Cancer Treat. Rep.,70: 1423-1429, 1986.701423  1986  [PubMed]
     
    Patterson, B. M.; Healey, J. H.; Cornell, C. N.; and Sharrock, N. E.: Cardiac arrest during hip arthroplasty with a cemented long-stem component. A report of seven cases.. J Bone Joint Surg,73-A: 271-277, Feb. 1991.73-A271  1991 
     
    Perez, J. E.; Machiavelli, M.; Leone, B. A.; Romero, A.; Rabinovich, M. G.; Vallejo, C. T.; Bianco, A.; Rodriguez, R.; Cuevas, M. A.; and Alvarez, L. A.: Bone-only versus visceral-only metastatic pattern in breast cancer: analysis of 150 patients. A GOCS study. Am. J. Clin. Oncol.,13: 294-298, 1990.13294  1990  [PubMed]
     
    Roila, F.; Lupattelli, M.; Sassi, M.; Basurto, C.; Bracarda, S.; Picciafuoco, M.; Boschetti, E.; Milella, G.; Ballatori, E.; Tonato, M.; and Del Favero, A.: Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients' performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales.. Ann. Oncol.,2: 437-439, 1991.2437  1991  [PubMed]
     
    Sorensen, J. B.; Klee, M.; Palshof, T.; and Hansen, H. H.: Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study. . British J. Cancer,67: 773-775, 1993.67773  1993 
     
    Vena, V. E.; Hsu, J.; Rosier, R. N.; and O'Keefe, R. J.: Pelvic reconstruction for severe periacetabular metastatic disease.. Clin. Orthop.,362: 171-180, 1999.362171  1999  [PubMed]
     
    Verger, E.; Salamero, M.; and Conill, C.: Can Karnofsky performance status be transformed to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scoring scale and vice versa?. European J. Cancer,28A: 1328-1330, 1992.28A1328  1992 
     
    Walker, R. H.: Pelvic reconstruction/total hip arthroplasty for metastatic acetabular insufficiency. Clin. Orthop.,294: 170-175, 1993.294170  1993  [PubMed]
     
    Yamashita, K.; Koyama, H.; and Inaji, H.: Prognostic significance of bone metastasis from breast cancer. Clin. Orthop.,312: 89-94, 1995.31289  1995  [PubMed]
     
    Zinser, J. W.; Hortobagyi, G. N.; Buzdar, A. U.; Smith, T. L.; and Fraschini, G.: Clinical course of breast cancer patients with liver metastases. J. Clin. Oncol.,5: 773-782, 1987.5773  1987  [PubMed]
     

    Submit a comment

    Topics

    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 1:Diagram demonstrating the triangulation guide used to place pelvic-acetabular pins and screws accurately and safely in an antegrade fashion. (See the Materials and Methods section of the article for the details of this operative technique.)
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-A:Figs. 2-A, 2-B, and 2-C: A patient who had a metastatic lesion involving the right acetabulum.
    Fig. 2-A: Pelvic radiograph demonstrating the metastatic lesion with a pathological fracture of the medial acetabular wall (large arrow). There is medial displacement of the acetabular fracture and a protrusio deformity. Discontinuity is also noted in the subchondral bone line of the superior acetabular dome (small arrows), demonstrating destruction of the bone in this area by the cancer.
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-B:Computerized tomography scan showing involvement of the posterior and anterior columns by the metastatic lesion. It is difficult to appreciate this fully on the plain radiograph. This image also identifies the fracture and demonstrates the extension of the lesion outside the confines of the bone (arrow).
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 2-C:Radiograph showing the acetabular reconstruction with 170-millimeter cannulated screws to reinforce the columns. The dome was augmented with cement. A protrusio ring (Healey Revision Cup; Biomet) was used to replace the deficient medial wall. The cup was placed laterally in relation to the original acetabulum, and the flange was used to prevent medial migration of the cup.
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 3:Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves, including 95 percent confidence intervals, for patients who had metastatic disease, with and without visceral metastases. Comparison of the two curves demonstrates the significant negative influence of visceral metastasis on survival (p < 0.001).
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 4:Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves, including 95 percent confidence intervals, for patients with metastatic breast carcinoma and for patients with any other type of metastatic carcinoma. Comparison of the two curves demonstrates the difference in survival between these two groups, with patients with metastatic breast carcinoma surviving significantly longer than those with any other type of metastatic cancer (p < 0.004).
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-A:Figs. 5-A, 5-B, and 5-C: A patient who had prostate cancer that metastasized to involve the anterior column, medial wall, and superior dome of the right acetabulum.
    Fig. 5-A: Preoperative radiograph demonstrating the large lytic lesion involving the acetabulum (arrow).
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-B: Postoperative radiograph illustrating the reconstruction with antegrade pin reinforcement of the acetabular dome and a cemented protrusio cup.
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
    +Fig. 5-C:Follow-up radiograph showing local progression of the disease, between eight and nine months postoperatively, causing progression of the pelvic osteolysis. This resulted in a failure of fixation with fracture of the cement and shifting of the implant into a vertical position. The patient returned to his preoperative level of function (wheelchair-bound) at this point; however, he still had a reduction in pain compared with the preoperative status. With current reconstructive techniques, longer pins would have been used to engage both the anterior and the posterior column; the pins would have been placed medial to the weight-bearing axis of the socket to act as a buttress and to prevent the development of a protrusion deformity.
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable I:  Distribution of Primary Cancer
    Primary SiteNo. of Patients
    Breast18 (33%)
    Kidney  7 (13%)
    Prostate  7 (13%)
    Multiple myeloma  5
    Lung  4
    Bladder  4
    Leiomyosarcoma  2
    Melanoma  2
    Thyroid  2
    Colon  1
    Esophagus  1
    Pheochromocytoma  1
    Unknown  1
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable II:  Preoperative Performance Status According to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Scale6
    ValueDescriptionNo. of Patients
    0Normal activity  3
    1Symptoms, but nearly full ability to walk12
    2Some bed time, but needs to be in bed <50 percent of time15
    3Bedridden 50 percent of daytime16
    4Totally bedridden  9
    Anchor for JumpAnchor for JumpTable III:  Bone Integrity and Acetabular Reconstruction
    *The values are given as the number of patients, with the number of modified Harrington reconstructions in parentheses.
    Anatomical LocationSufficient*  Insufficient*
    Anterior column35 (2)20 (6)
    Posterior column28 (4)  27 (17)
    Dome  8 (5)  47 (42)
    Medial wall13 (0)  42 (11)
    Coleman, R. E., and Rubens, R. D.: The clinical course of bone metastases from breast cancer. British J. Cancer,55: 61-66, 1987.5561  1987 
     
    Conill, C.; Verger, E.; and Salamero, M.: Performance status assessment in cancer patients. Cancer,65: 1864-1866, 1990.651864  1990  [PubMed]
     
    Dunphy, F. R.; Spitzer, G.; Fornoff, J. E.; Yau, J. C.; Huan, S. D.; Dicke, K. A.; Buzdar, A. U.; and Hortobagyi, G. N.: Factors predicting long-term survival for metastatic breast cancer patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and bone marrow support. Cancer,73: 2157-2167, 1994.732157  1994  [PubMed]
     
    Harrington, K. D.: The management of acetabular insufficiency secondary to metastatic malignant disease. J Bone Joint Surg,63-A: 653-664, April 1981..63-A653  1981. 
     
    Matzkin, H.; Perito, P. E.; and Soloway, M. S.: Prognostic factors in metastatic prostate cancer. Cancer,72: 3788-3792, 1993.723788  1993  [PubMed]
     
    Nercessian, O. A., and Joshi, R. P.: General principles of surgical technique. In The Hip, pp. 951-958. Edited by J. J. Callaghan, A. G. Rosenberg, and H. E. Rubash. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven, 1998. 
     
    Orr, S. T., and Aisner, S.: Performance status assessment among oncology patients: a review. Cancer Treat. Rep.,70: 1423-1429, 1986.701423  1986  [PubMed]
     
    Patterson, B. M.; Healey, J. H.; Cornell, C. N.; and Sharrock, N. E.: Cardiac arrest during hip arthroplasty with a cemented long-stem component. A report of seven cases.. J Bone Joint Surg,73-A: 271-277, Feb. 1991.73-A271  1991 
     
    Perez, J. E.; Machiavelli, M.; Leone, B. A.; Romero, A.; Rabinovich, M. G.; Vallejo, C. T.; Bianco, A.; Rodriguez, R.; Cuevas, M. A.; and Alvarez, L. A.: Bone-only versus visceral-only metastatic pattern in breast cancer: analysis of 150 patients. A GOCS study. Am. J. Clin. Oncol.,13: 294-298, 1990.13294  1990  [PubMed]
     
    Roila, F.; Lupattelli, M.; Sassi, M.; Basurto, C.; Bracarda, S.; Picciafuoco, M.; Boschetti, E.; Milella, G.; Ballatori, E.; Tonato, M.; and Del Favero, A.: Intra and interobserver variability in cancer patients' performance status assessed according to Karnofsky and ECOG scales.. Ann. Oncol.,2: 437-439, 1991.2437  1991  [PubMed]
     
    Sorensen, J. B.; Klee, M.; Palshof, T.; and Hansen, H. H.: Performance status assessment in cancer patients. An inter-observer variability study. . British J. Cancer,67: 773-775, 1993.67773  1993 
     
    Vena, V. E.; Hsu, J.; Rosier, R. N.; and O'Keefe, R. J.: Pelvic reconstruction for severe periacetabular metastatic disease.. Clin. Orthop.,362: 171-180, 1999.362171  1999  [PubMed]
     
    Verger, E.; Salamero, M.; and Conill, C.: Can Karnofsky performance status be transformed to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scoring scale and vice versa?. European J. Cancer,28A: 1328-1330, 1992.28A1328  1992 
     
    Walker, R. H.: Pelvic reconstruction/total hip arthroplasty for metastatic acetabular insufficiency. Clin. Orthop.,294: 170-175, 1993.294170  1993  [PubMed]
     
    Yamashita, K.; Koyama, H.; and Inaji, H.: Prognostic significance of bone metastasis from breast cancer. Clin. Orthop.,312: 89-94, 1995.31289  1995  [PubMed]
     
    Zinser, J. W.; Hortobagyi, G. N.; Buzdar, A. U.; Smith, T. L.; and Fraschini, G.: Clinical course of breast cancer patients with liver metastases. J. Clin. Oncol.,5: 773-782, 1987.5773  1987  [PubMed]
     
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    MRI of the reconstructed ulnar collateral ligament.
    AJR. American journal of roentgenology: Issue date- 2011 Nov
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center