Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum

Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Guzik, Grzegorz [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2016

Schlagwörter:	Bone metastases Bone cement augmentation Pelvic surgeries Acetabuloplasty Modular endoprosthesis

Anmerkung:	© Guzik. 2016

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research - London : Biomed Central, 2006, 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr.
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:11 ; year:2016 ; number:1 ; day:28 ; month:04

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z

Katalog-ID:	SPR030034760

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR030034760
003	DE-627
005	20230519080346.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201007s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR030034760
035			\|a (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Guzik, Grzegorz \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
264		1	\|c 2016
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Guzik. 2016
520			\|a Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain.
650		4	\|a Bone metastases \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Bone cement augmentation \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Pelvic surgeries \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Acetabuloplasty \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Modular endoprosthesis \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research \|d London : Biomed Central, 2006 \|g 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. \|w (DE-627)518346145 \|w (DE-600)2252548-8 \|x 1749-799X \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:11 \|g year:2016 \|g number:1 \|g day:28 \|g month:04
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 11 \|j 2016 \|e 1 \|b 28 \|c 04

Indexfelder

author_variant	g g gg
matchkey_str	article:1749799X:2016----::ramnomtsailsosoaiei
hierarchy_sort_str	2016
publishDate	2016
allfields	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z doi (DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guzik, Grzegorz verfasserin aut Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Guzik. 2016 Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2016 1 28 04
spelling	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z doi (DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guzik, Grzegorz verfasserin aut Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Guzik. 2016 Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2016 1 28 04
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z doi (DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guzik, Grzegorz verfasserin aut Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Guzik. 2016 Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2016 1 28 04
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z doi (DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guzik, Grzegorz verfasserin aut Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Guzik. 2016 Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2016 1 28 04
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z doi (DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Guzik, Grzegorz verfasserin aut Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Guzik. 2016 Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2016 1 28 04
language	English
source	Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04
sourceStr	Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr. volume:11 year:2016 number:1 day:28 month:04
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Bone metastases Bone cement augmentation Pelvic surgeries Acetabuloplasty Modular endoprosthesis
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Guzik, Grzegorz @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2016-04-28T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	518346145
id	SPR030034760
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR030034760</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519080346.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR030034760</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guzik, Grzegorz</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Guzik. 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bone metastases</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bone cement augmentation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pelvic surgeries</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Acetabuloplasty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Modular endoprosthesis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Biomed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)518346145</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2252548-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1749-799X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Guzik, Grzegorz
spellingShingle	Guzik, Grzegorz misc Bone metastases misc Bone cement augmentation misc Pelvic surgeries misc Acetabuloplasty misc Modular endoprosthesis Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
authorStr	Guzik, Grzegorz
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)518346145
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1749-799X
topic_title	Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum Bone metastases (dpeaa)DE-He213 Bone cement augmentation (dpeaa)DE-He213 Pelvic surgeries (dpeaa)DE-He213 Acetabuloplasty (dpeaa)DE-He213 Modular endoprosthesis (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Bone metastases misc Bone cement augmentation misc Pelvic surgeries misc Acetabuloplasty misc Modular endoprosthesis
topic_unstemmed	misc Bone metastases misc Bone cement augmentation misc Pelvic surgeries misc Acetabuloplasty misc Modular endoprosthesis
topic_browse	misc Bone metastases misc Bone cement augmentation misc Pelvic surgeries misc Acetabuloplasty misc Modular endoprosthesis
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
hierarchy_parent_id	518346145
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8
title	Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR030034760 (SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e
title_full	Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
author_sort	Guzik, Grzegorz
journal	Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
journalStr	Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2016
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Guzik, Grzegorz
container_volume	11
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Guzik, Grzegorz
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z
title_sort	treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
title_auth	Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
abstract	Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. © Guzik. 2016
abstractGer	Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. © Guzik. 2016
abstract_unstemmed	Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain. © Guzik. 2016
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z
remote_bool	true
ppnlink	518346145
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z
up_date	2024-07-03T13:28:32.922Z
_version_	1803564679615741952
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR030034760</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519080346.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR030034760</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s13018-016-0384-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Guzik, Grzegorz</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Guzik. 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area cause troublesome pain and reduced mobility of the patients. Radiotherapy effectively decreases pain, yet it does not restore the ability to load the joint. Surgical treatment involving resection of metastatic lesions and joint reconstruction using bone grafts is burdened with a high rate of complications. Modular tumor prostheses are being increasingly used. In some cases, it is possible to strengthen the acetabular roof with bone cement using vertebroplasty kits. The aim of the study was to demonstrate various methods of treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the periacetabular area together with the analysis of their results and effectiveness. Methods Between 2010 and 2015, 27 patients with cancer metastases to the acetabulum were treated at our department. Qualification for surgical treatment was multifaceted with numerous aspects being considered. They included patients’ general condition, type of neoplasm, clinical stage, and prognosis. CT and MRI scans of the pelvis were performed in each case. Before the surgery and 3 months following the surgery, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity, Karnofsky functional status, and motor ability according to the Harris scale were evaluated. Bone cement (PMMA)-augmentation was performed in 21 patients, of whom nine had cement injected precutaneously and 12 at proximal femur resection alloplasty. Hemipelvectomy Type II combined with implantation of LUMiC resection prosthesis of the acetabulum were performed in six cases. Results The quality of life improved in all the patients. After percutaneous cement injection, the mean pain intensity VAS score was 2.7, and the mean Karnofsky functional status score was 71.8. The mean postoperative Harris hip score (HHS) was 94 points. The patients who had undergone resection alloplasty on the proximal femur combined with periacetabular cement injection were walking using one crutch. In this group of patients, the mean postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and gait efficiency scores were 4.5, 65.7, and 82 points, respectively. The mean pain intensity VAS score in patients who had LUMiC prostheses implanted was 3.4. Their mean functional status score was 65 and the gait efficiency score 71 points. All the patients were able to walk on crutches. Conclusions Strengthening of the acetabular roof with bone cement in a specific group of patients is an adequate method of treatment which decreases pain and allows for loading the affected limb while walking. Internal hemipelvectomy combined with LUMiC prosthesis implantation makes it possible for the patients to walk using crutches and significantly reduces pain.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bone metastases</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Bone cement augmentation</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Pelvic surgeries</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Acetabuloplasty</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Modular endoprosthesis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Biomed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2016), 1 vom: 28. Apr.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)518346145</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2252548-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1749-799X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:04</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-016-0384-z</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">04</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.398241

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Treatment of metastatic lesions localized in the acetabulum

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?