Knochenmetastasen – Pathophysiologie, Diagnostik und Therapie (Teil 2)

Zusammenfassung

Der vorliegende 2. Teil dieser Übersichtsarbeit befasst sich mit den unterschiedlichen operativen Therapiemöglichkeiten von Skelettmetastasen in Abhängigkeit von deren Lokalisation und der individuellen Prognose des Patienten. Obwohl im Falle der ossären Metastasierung mit wenigen Ausnahmen von einem palliativen Therapieschema ausgegangen wird, erreichen die Patienten dennoch Überlebensraten von mehreren Monaten bis Jahren in Abhängigkeit von der zugrunde liegenden Tumorentität. Zur Abschätzung der Prognose und Frakturgefährdung stehen verschiedene Scores zur Verfügung. Die Operationsindikation ist immer im Zusammenhang mit der Prognose und patientenindividuell zu stellen. Im Sinne des Erhaltens einer hohen Lebensqualität ist prinzipiell eine extremitätenerhaltende Therapie anzustreben. Diese lässt sich unterteilen in eine Resektion der Metastase mit Stabilisierung der Extremität, der alleinigen Stabilisierung sowie der weiten Resektion mit ossärer und funktioneller Defektrekonstruktion mittels einer Tumorendoprothese. Mit den heutigen Möglichkeiten der intra- und perioperativen Patientenversorgung ist eine Vielzahl von Implantaten und Möglichkeiten der Augmentation von metastatischen Knochendefekten verfügbar. Im Vordergrund steht jedoch nicht die chirurgische Durchführbarkeit, sondern die onkologisch sinnvolle und patientengerechte Wahl der Therapie und des operativen Vorgehens.

Schlüsselwörter

Knochenmetastase - pathologische Fraktur - Skeletal-related Events (SRE) - Stabilisierung

• References/Literatur

• 1 Durr HR, Refior HJ. [Prognosis of skeletal metastases]. Orthopade 1998; 27: 294-300
• 2 Dürr HR, Müller PE, Lenz T. et al. Surgical treatment of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; (396) 191-196
• 3 Dürr HR, Maier M, Pfahler M. et al. Surgical treatment of osseous metastases in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367) 283-290
• 4 Kehrer M, Koob S, Strauss A. et al. [Multiple myeloma – current status in diagnostic testing and therapy]. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 575-586
• 5 Utzschneider S, Weber P, Fottner A. et al. [Prognosis-adapted surgical management of bone metastases]. Orthopade 2009; 38: 308 310–312 314–315
• 6 Bickels J, Dadia S, Lidar Z. Surgical management of metastatic bone disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91: 1503-1516
• 7 Willeumier JJ, van der Linden YM, van de Sande MAJ. et al. Treatment of pathological fractures of the long bones. EFORT Open Rev 2016; 1: 136-145
• 8 Coleman RE. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev 2001; 27: 165-176
• 9 Nijs SJ, Broos PL, Van Cutsem E. Treatment of a metastasis of a rectal carcinoma in the greater trochanter with the AO/ASIF Proximal Femoral Nail. A case report. Acta Chir Belg 2004; 104: 237-239
• 10 Conen K, Hagmann R, Hess V. et al. Incidence and predictors of bone metastases (BM) and skeletal-related events (SREs) in small cell lung cancer (SCLC): a Swiss patient cohort. J Cancer 2016; 7: 2110-2116
• 11 Sciubba DM, Gokaslan ZL, Suk I. et al. Positive and negative prognostic variables for patients undergoing spine surgery for metastatic breast disease. Eur Spine J 2007; 16: 1659-1667
• 12 Mundy GR. Metastasis to bone: causes, consequences and therapeutic opportunities. Nat Rev Cancer 2002; 2: 584-593
• 13 Guijarro A, Hernandez V, de la Morena JM. et al. Influence of the location and number of metastases in the survival of metastatic prostatic cancer patients. Actas Urol Esp 2017; 41: 226-233
• 14 Westhoff PG, de Graeff A, Monninkhof EM. et al. An easy tool to predict survival in patients receiving radiation therapy for painful bone metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90: 739-747
• 15 Tokuhashi Y, Uei H, Oshima M. et al. Scoring system for prediction of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. World J Orthop 2014; 5: 262-271
• 16 Gruenberg M, Mereles ME, Willhuber GOC. et al. Usefulness of Tokuhashi score in survival prediction of patients operated for vertebral metastatic disease. Global Spine J 2017; 7: 260-265
• 17 Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; (249) 256-264
• 18 Gao H, Liu Z, Wang B. et al. Clinical and functional comparison of endoprosthetic replacement with intramedullary nailing for treating proximal femur metastasis. Chin J Cancer Res 2016; 28: 209-214
• 19 Windhager R. [New developments in orthopedic oncology]. Orthopade 2009; 38: 307
• 20 Layalle I, Flandroy P, Trotteur G. et al. Arterial embolization of bone metastases: is it worthwhile?. J Belge Radiol 1998; 81: 223-225
• 21 Pazionis TJ, Papanastassiou ID, Maybody M. et al. Embolization of hypervascular bone metastases reduces intraoperative blood loss: a case-control study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472: 3179-3187
• 22 Gul G, Sendur MA, Aksoy S. et al. A comprehensive review of denosumab for bone metastasis in patients with solid tumors. Curr Med Res Opin 2016; 32: 133-145
• 23 Friedl W. Indication, management and results of surgical therapy for pathological fractures in patients with bone metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 1990; 16: 380-396
• 24 Parrish FF, Murray JA. Surgical treatment for secondary neoplastic fractures. A retrospective study of ninety-six patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1970; 52: 665-686
• 25 Fery A, Horle G, Krakowski I. et al. [Surgical treatment of metastases of the humerus]. J Chir (Paris) 1988; 125: 721-729
• 26 Bauze AJ, Clayer MT. Treatment of pathological fractures of the humerus with a locked intramedullary nail. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2003; 11: 34-37
• 27 Laitinen M, Nieminen J, Pakarinen TK. Treatment of pathological humerus shaft fractures with intramedullary nails with or without cement fixation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; 131: 503-508
• 28 Janssen SJ, van Dijke M, Lozano-Calderon SA. et al. Complications after surgery for metastatic humeral lesions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: 207-215
• 29 Yang Y, Yang RL, Guo W. [Retrospective analysis of surgical treatment for metastases in humerus of 59 cases]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 2011; 43: 681-685
• 30 Gruber G, Zacherl M, Leithner A. et al. [Surgical treatment of pathologic fractures of the humerus and femur]. Orthopade 2009; 38: 324 326–328 330–324
• 31 Choi ES, Han I, Cho HS. et al. Intramedullary nailing for pathological fractures of the proximal humerus. Clin Orthop Surg 2016; 8: 458-464
• 32 Spindel J, Miszczyk L, Koczy B. et al. The efficacy analysis of partial bone resection procedure in pathological fractures treatment (own experience). Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 2003; 5: 353-357
• 33 Chrobok A, Spindel J, Miszczyk L. et al. The surgical management of metastases to humerus-clinical evaluation. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 2003; 5: 348-352
• 34 Raiss P, Kinkel S, Sauter U. et al. Replacement of the proximal humerus with MUTARS tumor endoprostheses. Eur J Surg Oncol 2010; 36: 371-377
• 35 Tang X, Guo W, Yang R. et al. Synthetic mesh improves shoulder function after intraarticular resection and prosthetic replacement of proximal humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473: 1464-1471
• 36 Schmolders J, Koob S, Schepers P. et al. Silver-coated endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal humerus in case of tumour-is there an increased risk of periprosthetic infection by using a trevira tube?. Int Orthop 2017; 41: 423-428
• 37 Schmolders J, Koob S, Schepers P. et al. [The role of a modular universal tumour and revision system (MUTARS^®) in lower limb endoprosthetic revision surgery – outcome analysis of 25 patients]. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 61-66
• 38 Mardian S, Schaser KD, Ruppert M. et al. Skeletal metastatic disease of the femur: results by management with intramedullary nailing. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2015; 82: 192-197
• 39 Arvinius C, Parra JL, Mateo LS. et al. Benefits of early intramedullary nailing in femoral metastases. Int Orthop 2014; 38: 129-132
• 40 Biewener A, Meyer J, Rentsch C. et al. [Internal fixation of meta- and diaphyseal intercalary bone defects after tumour resection with intramedullary nailing and porous polymethylmetacrylate (PMMA) spacer]. Orthopade 2007; 36: 152-158 160–163
• 41 Doung YC, Kenan S, Rapp T. Metastatic lesions of the proximal femur. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 2011; 69: 81-86
• 42 Wedin R, Bauer HC. Surgical treatment of skeletal metastatic lesions of the proximal femur: endoprosthesis or reconstruction nail?. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 1653-1657
• 43 Schmolders J, Koob S, Schepers P. et al. Lower limb reconstruction in tumor patients using modular silver-coated megaprostheses with regard to perimegaprosthetic joint infection: a case series, including 100 patients and review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2017; 137: 149-153
• 44 Delank KS, Wendtner C, Eich HT. et al. The treatment of spinal metastases. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108: 71-79
• 45 Saqui AE, Aggouri M, Benzagmout M. et al. [Surgical treatment of spinal bone metastases]. Pan Afr Med J 2017; 26: 153
• 46 Janka M, Füssel S, Unterpaintner I. et al. [Spinal metastases–diagnosis and treatment]. MMW Fortschr Med 2016; 158: 50-51 53
• 47 Bornemann R, Jansen TR, Kabir K. et al. Comparison of radiofrequency-targeted vertebral augmentation with balloon kyphoplasty for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures: 2-year results. Clin Spine Surg 2017; 30: E247-E251
• 48 Koob S, Kehrer M, Strauss A. et al. [Bone metastases – pathophysiology, diagnostic testing and therapy (part 1)]. Z Orthop Unfall 2017; 155: 716-726
• 49 Errani C, Mavrogeni AF, Cevolani L. et al. Treatment for long bone metastases based on a systematic literature review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2017; 2: 205-211