TY - JOUR
T1 - Factors associated with the decision of operative procedure for proximal femoral bone metastasis
T2 - Questionnaire survey to institutions participating the Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group
AU - Araki, Nobuhito
AU - Chuman, Hirokazu
AU - Matsunobu, Tomoya
AU - Tanaka, Kazuhiro
AU - Katagiri, Hirohisa
AU - Kunisada, Toshiyuki
AU - Hiruma, Toru
AU - Hiraga, Hiroaki
AU - Morioka, Hideo
AU - Hatano, Hiroshi
AU - Asanuma, Kunihiro
AU - Nishida, Yoshihiro
AU - Hiraoka, Koji
AU - Okamoto, Takeshi
AU - Abe, Satoshi
AU - Watanuki, Munenori
AU - Morii, Takeshi
AU - Sugiura, Hideshi
AU - Yoshida, Yukihiro
AU - Ohno, Takatoshi
AU - Outani, Hidetatsu
AU - Yokoyama, Koichiro
AU - Shimose, Shoji
AU - Fukuda, Haruhiko
AU - Iwamoto, Yukihide
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to acknowledge Dr Yuri Ito, Center for Cancer Control and Statistics, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases for her help in statistics of this study, and Dr Junko Eba. JCOG Data Center, Center for Research Administration and Support, National Cancer Center for her help in manuscript preparation. This study is supported by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund ( 23-A-16 , 23-A-20 , 26-A-4 ) and the Agency for Medical Research and Development ( 17ck0106336h0001 ), Japan.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Authors
PY - 2017/9
Y1 - 2017/9
N2 - Background Pathological fracture of the proximal femur is a main cause of cancer patients losing their ability to walk. Although both osteosynthetic devices (predominantly intramedullary nails) and prosthetic replacement have been widely performed for treatment, controversies exist regarding which procedure should be used for the various conditions. In order to decide the eligibility criteria of a planned randomized prospective study about the treatment of pathological fractures of the proximal femur, we assessed the factors affecting the selection of operative procedures using questionnaires sent to the members of the Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Study Group (BSTTSG) of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG). Methods Questionnaire surveys to evaluate (1) the priority levels of the factors, (2) the equipoise range of each factor in situations where either procedure could be applied, (3) risk and benefit of each procedure, and (4) the degree of bone destruction affecting the selection of operative procedures, were sent to 26 institutions. Results Over 80% of the institutions answered. Orthopaedic surgeons of BSTTSG decided on the procedure according to the following factors in descending order: life expectancy, performance status before fracture, the degree of bone destruction, walking ability before fracture, general complications, the number of bone metastases in other sites, and the visceral metastasis status. With regard to bone destruction, (1) the involvement of the head, neck, calcar, and intertrochanteric region, (2) transverse destruction >1/2, and (3) soft-tissue tumor extension, were the factors that led to the choice of prosthesis treatment. Conclusions Using these identified factors, the inclusion criteria for the prospective randomized study of the surgical treatment of metastatic bone tumors of the proximal femur were optimized. The evaluation system about the bone destruction of metastases needs to be refined through the following prospective randomized study.
AB - Background Pathological fracture of the proximal femur is a main cause of cancer patients losing their ability to walk. Although both osteosynthetic devices (predominantly intramedullary nails) and prosthetic replacement have been widely performed for treatment, controversies exist regarding which procedure should be used for the various conditions. In order to decide the eligibility criteria of a planned randomized prospective study about the treatment of pathological fractures of the proximal femur, we assessed the factors affecting the selection of operative procedures using questionnaires sent to the members of the Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Study Group (BSTTSG) of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG). Methods Questionnaire surveys to evaluate (1) the priority levels of the factors, (2) the equipoise range of each factor in situations where either procedure could be applied, (3) risk and benefit of each procedure, and (4) the degree of bone destruction affecting the selection of operative procedures, were sent to 26 institutions. Results Over 80% of the institutions answered. Orthopaedic surgeons of BSTTSG decided on the procedure according to the following factors in descending order: life expectancy, performance status before fracture, the degree of bone destruction, walking ability before fracture, general complications, the number of bone metastases in other sites, and the visceral metastasis status. With regard to bone destruction, (1) the involvement of the head, neck, calcar, and intertrochanteric region, (2) transverse destruction >1/2, and (3) soft-tissue tumor extension, were the factors that led to the choice of prosthesis treatment. Conclusions Using these identified factors, the inclusion criteria for the prospective randomized study of the surgical treatment of metastatic bone tumors of the proximal femur were optimized. The evaluation system about the bone destruction of metastases needs to be refined through the following prospective randomized study.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029035428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029035428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jos.2017.05.012
DO - 10.1016/j.jos.2017.05.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 28629828
AN - SCOPUS:85029035428
SN - 0949-2658
VL - 22
SP - 938
EP - 945
JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Science
JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Science
IS - 5
ER -