Download PDF
The Journal of Hip Surgery 2019; 03(02): 093-103
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1681080
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Management of Pathologic Fractures Around the Hip: Part 1–Femur

Richard L. Auran
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona
,
Michael D. Duran
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona
,
Amalia M. de Comas
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona
2   Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, The CORE Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
,
David J. Jacofsky
2   Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, The CORE Institute, Phoenix, Arizona
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

21 January 2019

28 January 2019

Publication Date:
08 March 2019 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Evaluation and management of suspected pathologic fractures, secondary to metastatic disease, require a comprehensive understanding of the underlying disease process and a multidisciplinary treatment approach. Recognition of a pathologic fracture can be challenging, and the diagnosis today remains often missed, but is necessary for appropriate care. The incidence of cancer in the United States is on the rise, and with advances in medical and surgical care the prevalence of cancer is increasing as well. This will result in a similar trend of increased incidence and prevalence of metastatic disease requiring treatment from orthopaedic surgeons. The proximal femur is the most common location for metastatic lesions in the appendicular skeleton, and as such sees a disproportionate number of pathologic fractures. This site of injury is particularly challenging to manage due to the transmission of high forces through this region during ambulation. A combination of adjunct therapies and surgical intervention will maximize the outcomes for these patients. Obtaining a tissue diagnosis, especially in the setting of a solitary bone lesion, is a crucial and required early step in this process.

Keywords

pathologic - metastases - fracture - femur - hip
 

  • References

  • 1 Noone AM, Howlader N, Krapcho M. , et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2015. 2018; available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2015/ . Accessed February 12, 2019
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Coleman RE. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev 2001; 27 (03) 165-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Coleman RE. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12 (20, Pt 2): 6243s-6249s
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Swanson KC, Pritchard DJ, Sim FH. Surgical treatment of metastatic disease of the femur. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2000; 8 (01) 56-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ward WG, Holsenbeck S, Dorey FJ, Spang J, Howe D. Metastatic disease of the femur: surgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; ;(415, Suppl): S230-S244
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gainor BJ, Buchert P. Fracture healing in metastatic bone disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1983; (178) 297-302
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Soldatos T, Chalian M, Attar S, McCarthy EF, Carrino JA, Fayad LM. Imaging differentiation of pathologic fractures caused by primary and secondary bone tumors. Eur J Radiol 2013; 82 (01) e36-e42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Jacofsky DJ, Haidukewych GJ. Management of pathologic fractures of the proximal femur: state of the art. J Orthop Trauma 2004; 18 (07) 459-469
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rougraff BT, Kneisl JS, Simon MA. Skeletal metastases of unknown origin. A prospective study of a diagnostic strategy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75 (09) 1276-1281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Vinholes J, Coleman R, Eastell R. Effects of bone metastases on bone metabolism: implications for diagnosis, imaging and assessment of response to cancer treatment. Cancer Treat Rev 1996; 22 (04) 289-331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Takagi T, Katagiri H, Kim Y. , et al. Skeletal metastases of unknown primary origin at the initial visit: A retrospective analysis of 286 cases. PLoS One 2015; 10 (06) e0129428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Maciel MJ, Tyng CJ, Barbosa PN. , et al. Computed tomography-guided percutaneous biopsy of bone lesions: rate of diagnostic success and complications. Radiol Bras 2014; 47 (05) 269-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Adams SC, Potter BK, Pitcher DJ, Temple HT. Office-based core needle biopsy of bone and soft tissue malignancies: an accurate alternative to open biopsy with infrequent complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468 (10) 2774-2780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sarahrudi K, Greitbauer M, Platzer P, Hausmann JT, Heinz T, Vécsei V. Surgical treatment of metastatic fractures of the femur: a retrospective analysis of 142 patients. J Trauma 2009; 66 (04) 1158-1163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Habermann ET, Sachs R, Stern RE, Hirsh DM, Anderson Jr WJ. The pathology and treatment of metastatic disease of the femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982; (169) 70-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Coleman RE. Bisphosphonates: clinical experience. Oncologist 2004; 9 (Suppl. 04) 14-27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sonmez M, Akagun T, Topbas M. , et al. Effect of pathologic fractures on survival in multiple myeloma patients: a case control study. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2008; 27: 11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Saad F, Lipton A, Cook R, Chen YM, Smith M, Coleman R. Pathologic fractures correlate with reduced survival in patients with malignant bone disease. Cancer 2007; 110 (08) 1860-1867
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Alegre A, Gironella M, Bailén A, Giraldo P. Zoledronic acid in the management of bone disease as a consequence of multiple myeloma: a review. Eur J Haematol 2014; 92 (03) 181-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 O'Carrigan B, Wong MH, Willson ML, Stockler MR, Pavlakis N, Goodwin A. Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 10: CD003474
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rosen LS, Gordon D, Tchekmedyian NS. , et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients with nonsmall cell lung carcinoma and other solid tumors: a randomized, Phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Cancer 2004; 100 (12) 2613-2621
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Saad F, Gleason DM, Murray R. , et al; Zoledronic Acid Prostate Cancer Study Group. Long-term efficacy of zoledronic acid for the prevention of skeletal complications in patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96 (11) 879-882
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Stopeck AT, Lipton A, Body JJ. , et al. Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28 (35) 5132-5139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Fizazi K, Carducci M, Smith M. , et al. Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study. Lancet 2011; 377 (9768): 813-822
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Scagliotti GV, Hirsh V, Siena S. , et al. Overall survival improvement in patients with lung cancer and bone metastases treated with denosumab versus zoledronic acid: subgroup analysis from a randomized phase 3 study. J Thorac Oncol 2012; 7 (12) 1823-1829
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Body JJ, Facon T, Coleman RE. , et al. A study of the biological receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand inhibitor, denosumab, in patients with multiple myeloma or bone metastases from breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12 (04) 1221-1228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Henry DH, Costa L, Goldwasser F. , et al. Randomized, double-blind study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced cancer (excluding breast and prostate cancer) or multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29 (09) 1125-1132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Dodré E, Lefebvre G, Cockenpot E, Chastanet P, Cotten A. Interventional MSK procedures: the hip. Br J Radiol 2016; 89 (1057): 20150408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Chatziioannou AN, Johnson ME, Pneumaticos SG, Lawrence DD, Carrasco CH. Preoperative embolization of bone metastases from renal cell carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2000; 10 (04) 593-596
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Pazionis TJ, Papanastassiou ID, Maybody M, Healey JH. Embolization of hypervascular bone metastases reduces intraoperative blood loss: a case-control study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (10) 3179-3187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lyman GH, Khorana AA, Falanga A. , et al; American Society of Clinical Oncology. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline: recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25 (34) 5490-5505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Townsend PW, Smalley SR, Cozad SC, Rosenthal HG, Hassanein RE. Role of postoperative radiation therapy after stabilization of fractures caused by metastatic disease. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31 (01) 43-49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Eggermont F, Derikx LC, Verdonschot N. , et al. Limited short-term effect of palliative radiation therapy on quantitative computed tomography-derived bone mineral density in femora with metastases. Adv Radiat Oncol 2016; 2 (01) 53-61
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Amini A, Altoos B, Bourlon MT. , et al. Local control rates of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to the bone using stereotactic body radiation therapy: Is RCC truly radioresistant?. Pract Radiat Oncol 2015; 5 (06) e589-e596
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Fidler M. Incidence of fracture through metastases in long bones. Acta Orthop Scand 1981; 52 (06) 623-627
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Brooks DB, Burstein AH, Frankel VH. The biomechanics of torsional fractures. The stress concentration effect of a drill hole. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1970; 52 (03) 507-514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 van den Bekerom MP, Hilverdink EF, Sierevelt IN. , et al. A comparison of hemiarthroplasty with total hip replacement for displaced intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck: a randomised controlled multicentre trial in patients aged 70 years and over. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92 (10) 1422-1428
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Houdek MT, Wyles CC, Labott JR, Rose PS, Taunton MJ, Sim FH. Durability of hemiarthroplasty for pathologic proximal femur fractures. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (12) 3607-3610
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Lane JM, Sculco TP, Zolan S. Treatment of pathological fractures of the hip by endoprosthetic replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1980; 62 (06) 954-959
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Clarke HD, Damron TA, Sim FH. Head and neck replacement endoprosthesis for pathologic proximal femoral lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998; (353) 210-217
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Temple HT, Kuklo TR, Lehman Jr RA, Heekin RD, Berrey BH. Segmental limb reconstruction after tumor resection. Am J Orthop 2000; 29 (07) 524-529
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Cannon CP, Mirza AN, Lin PP, Lewis VO, Yasko AW. Proximal femoral endoprosthesis for the treatment of metastatic. Orthopedics 2008; 31 (04) 361
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Calabró T, Van Rooyen R, Piraino I. , et al. Reconstruction of the proximal femur with a modular resection prosthesis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2016; 26 (04) 415-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ward WG, Dorey F, Eckardt JJ. Total femoral endoprosthetic reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1995; (316) 195-206
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Ward WG, Johnston KS, Dorey FJ, Eckardt JJ. Loosening of massive proximal femoral cemented endoprostheses. Radiographic evidence of loosening mechanism. J Arthroplasty 1997; 12 (07) 741-750
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Blank AT, Lerman DM, Patel NM, Rapp TB. Is prophylactic intervention more cost-effective than the treatment of pathologic fractures in metastatic bone disease?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (07) 1563-1570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; (249) 256-264
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Damron TA, Morgan H, Prakash D, Grant W, Aronowitz J, Heiner J. Critical evaluation of Mirels' rating system for impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; ;(415, Suppl): S201-S207
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Benca E, Patsch JM, Mayr W, Pahr DH, Windhager R. The insufficiencies of risk analysis of impending pathological fractures in patients with femoral metastases: A literature review. Bone Rep 2016; 5: 51-56
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Villa-Camacho JC, Iyoha-Bello O, Behrouzi S, Snyder BD, Nazarian A. Computed tomography-based rigidity analysis: a review of the approach in preclinical and clinical studies. Bonekey Rep 2014; 3: 587
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Damron TA, Nazarian A, Entezari V. , et al. CT-based structural rigidity analysis is more accurate than Mirels scoring for fracture prediction in metastatic femoral lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2016; 474 (03) 643-651
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar