Features of replacement of extensive post-resection bone defects in pelvic and sacral tumors

Purpose of the study. To represent the results of a two-stage surgical treatment in patients with extensive pelvic bone defects.
Materials and methods. Data on 7 patients who underwent surgery for pelvic and sacrum tumors at the National Medical Research Centre for Oncology from 2016 up to 2020 are presented. The average age of the patients was 36 years. Patients with massive tumors that required a major resection of the posterior pelvis and the formation of an extensive bone defect requiring reconstruction with massive allografts and implants were selected for the study. 5 patients underwent different variations of sacrectomies with the resection of the iliac bones; 2 patients – interiliac-abdominal resections. For all these patients, surgical treatment was split into 2 stages.
Results. At the first stage we performed: 5 surgical interventions (total or extended sacrectomy at L5–S1 with lumbar-iliac bilateral stabilization with an 8‑screw pedicle system) in patients with sacral tumors. In 2 cases, an interilio-abdominal resection with the defect replacement with cement articulating spacer. Intraoperative blood loss on average was 1.8L. We used autohemotransfusion to compensate the intraoperative blood loss.
The 2nd (reconstructive) stage was completed on average after 3 months. The reconstructive stage was not accompanied by major trauma in all patients. The average blood loss was approximately 800 ml. There were no complications after the reconstructive surgical stage.
Conclusion. The described two-stage technique allowed to avoid severe infectious complications requiring removal of implants and grafts in all patients. Adequate spinal pelvic stabilization and/or spacing of the defect contributed to early functional rehabilitation of patients and the continuation of adequate adjuvant therapy in the interstage period. The delaying of the reconstruction allowed to reduce the duration and invasiveness of the main intervention without affecting the final result of treatment.

1. Zatsepin ST. Bone pathology of adults. Moscow: Medicine, 2001, 640 p. (In Russ.).

2. Piven IM, Shlykov IL, Kuznetsova NL. Features of treatment of patients with pelvic bone tumors. Bulletin of Traumatology and Orthopedics named after V. D. Chaklin. 2010;3(3):63–65. (In Russ.).

3. Aliyev MD, Sokolovsky VA, Dmitrieva NV, Sinyukova GT, Sycheva LYu, Amiraslanov AA, et al. Complications of endoprosthetics in patients with bone tumors. Bulletin of the N. N. Blokhin Russian Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2003;14(2-1):35–39. (In Russ.).

4. Karpenko VU, Derzhavin VA, Shchupak MU, Zheravin AA, Buharov AV, Bondarev AV, et al. Reconstruction with modular endoprosthesis after periacetabular resections in patiens with pelvic tumors. Early results. Multicenter research. Siberian Journal of Oncology. 2016;15(1):11–18. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21294/1814-4861-2016-15-1-11-18

5. Zubritsky VF, Kozlov YuA. Infectious complications during large joint replacement. Bulletin of the National Medical and Surgical Center N. I. Pirogov. 2012;7(1):98–103.

6. Feldenzer JA, McGauley JL, McGillicuddy JE. Sacral and presacral tumors: problems in diagnosis and management. Neurosurgery. 1989 Dec;25(6):884–891.

7. Stener B, Gunterberg B. High amputation of the sacrum for extirpation of tumors. Principles and technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1978 Dec;3(4):351–366. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-197812000-00009

8. Konovalov NA, Korolishin VA, Asyutin DS, Timonin SYu, Martynova MA, Zakirov BA, et al. Complications of surgical treatment of sacral tumors. Questions of neurosurgery named after N. N. Burdenko. 2019;83(1):67–74. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/neiro20198301167

9. Chernogorov PV, Vashchenko LN, Rastorguev EE, Atmachidi DP, Luganskaya RG, Ausheva TV, et al. Surgical treatment of malignant tumors of the sacrum. St. Petersburg: Collection of Scientific Articles. Modern Achievements of Traumatology and Orthopedics, 2018, 271–274 p. (In Russ.).

10. Teplyakov VV, Karpenko VYu, Derzhavin VA, Frank GA, Bulanov AA, Bukharov AV, et al. Reconstructive surgery in treatment of patients with malignant tumors of the pelvic ring. Sarcomas of the Bones, Soft Tissues and Skin Tumors. 2012;(3):16–29. (In Russ.).

11. Aliev MD, Musaev ER. Epidemiology of sacral tumors. Review. Sarcomas of the Bones, Soft Tissues and Skin Tumors. 2014;(1):7–15. (In Russ.).

12. Derzhavin VA, Karpenko VYu, Bukharov AV. Reconstruction of the pelvic ring in patients with tumors of the sacroiliac joint. Siberian journal of oncology. 2015;1(3):38–44. (In Russ.).

13. Enneking WF, Dunham WK. Resection and reconstruction for primary neoplasms involving the innominate bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978 Sep;60(6):731–746.

14. Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. Clinical recommendations. Malignant bone tumors. 2018. Available at: http://oncology.ru/association/clinical-guidelines/2018/zlokachestvennye_opukholi_kostey_pr2018.pdf, Accessed: 22.02.2022.