Cementoplasty and musculoskeletal interventions

Dimitri Filippiadis; Sean Tutton; Alexis Kelekis

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107338555.026

26 - Cementoplasty and musculoskeletal interventions

from Section VIII - Organ-specific cancers – musculoskeletal

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2016

Dimitri Filippiadis ,

Sean Tutton and

Alexis Kelekis

Edited by

Jean-Francois H. Geschwind and

Michael C. Soulen

Show author details

Dimitri Filippiadis: Affiliation:
University of Athens
Sean Tutton: Affiliation:
Medical College of Wisconsin
Alexis Kelekis: Affiliation:
University of Athens
Jean-Francois H. Geschwind: Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine, Connecticut
Michael C. Soulen: Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Nearly 60% of oncologic patients will eventually develop osseous metastasis with bone pain, potential fracture, and impaired mobility. While the first-line therapy for these patients is often medical, including narcotic analgesics, according to the World Health Organization recommendations, and bisphosphonate therapy such as zoledronic acid infusions, a significant portion of patients have intractable pain. Similarly, those patients who are treated with palliative external-beam radiotherapy may have incomplete pain relief that is not always durable. Furthermore, pain relief from radiotherapy can take up to 4 weeks and can be complicated by osteonecrosis or neural damage. The high percentage of oncologic patients suffering from painful metastatic bone lesions and their fractures, compounded with suboptimal results of conservative medical and radiotherapy, have been the drivers for development of minimally invasive local treatments, including embolization, ablation, and cement augmentation (also known as cementoplasty or osteoplasty).

Percutaneous cementoplasty is a term referring to the injection of poly methylmethacrylate (PMMA), a polymer (similar in certain ways to orthopedic cement) inside an osseous structure through a trocar under imaging guidance. When the technique is applied in the spine, the term used is vertebroplasty. Alternatives to standard vertebroplasty include balloon kyphoplasty, augmented vertebroplasty by means of stents, nitinol cages, and polyether ether ketone (PEEK) polymer cages, and radiofrequency-mediated vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. When one of these techniques is applied to the sacrum the term used is sacroplasty. Cement injection in peripheral bones is described by the term osteoplasty. The first ever description of imaging-guided cement injection was performed by Galibert et al. for the treatment of an aggressive cervical hemangioma. A wider term now used to include all these percutaneous approaches of material injection inside bone is bone augmentation.

Indications

When considering oncologic patients a strict definition of the treatment goal is necessary for best practice and outcomes. Palliative goals include cement injection for pain reduction in patients with multiple metastases, some of which are painful. Currently, new technologies and material allow us to consider curative treatment, which can be performed in oligometastatic patients, aiming at both local control and necrosis of the tumor as well as pain reduction and mobility improvement. In the latter case, cementoplasty must be combined with other therapies. such as radiotherapy, ablation, embolization, or surgical resection and/or fixation.

Type: Chapter
Information: Interventional Oncology
Principles and Practice of Image-Guided Cancer Therapy
, pp. 255 - 264

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338555.026 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lutz, S, Chowb, E. A review of recently published radiotherapy treatment guidelines for bone metastases: contrasts or convergence? J Bone Oncol 2012; 1: 18–23.Google Scholar

2. Kelekis, AD, Somon, T, Yilmaz, H, Bize, P, Brountzos, EN, Lovblad, K, Ruefenacht, D, Martin, JB. Interventional spine procedures. Eur J Radiol 2005; 55 (3): 362–383. PMID:16129245Google Scholar

3. Anselmetti, GC, Manca, A, Tutton, S, Chiara, G, Kelekis, A, Facchini, FR, Russo, F, Regge, D, Montemurro, F. Percutaneous vertebral augmentation assisted by PEEK implant in painful osteolytic vertebral metastasis involving the vertebral wall: experience on 40 patients. Pain Physician 2013; 16 (4): E397–E404.Google Scholar

4. Baerlocher, MO, Saad, WE, Dariushnia, S, Barr, JD, McGraw, JK, Nikolic, B; Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (2): 165–170.Google Scholar

5. Barr, JD, Jensen, ME, Hirsch, JA, McGraw, JK, Barr, RM, Brook, AL, Meyers, PM, Munk, PL, Murphy, KJ, O'Toole, JE, Rasmussen, PA, Ryken, TC, Sanelli, PC, Schwartzberg, MS, Seidenwurm, D, Tutton, SM, Zoarski, GH, Kuo, MD, Rose, SC, Cardella, JF. Position statement on percutaneous vertebral augmentation: a consensus statement developed by the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS), American College of Radiology (ACR), American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR), American Society of Spine Radiology (ASSR), Canadian Interventional Radiology Association (CIRA), and the Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS). J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (2): 171–181.Google Scholar

6. Gangi, A, Sabharwal, T, Irani, FG, Buy, X, Morales, GP, Adam, A Quality assurance guidelines for percutaneous vertebroplasty. CVIR 2006; 29 (2): 173–178.Google Scholar

7. Kortman, K, Ortiz, O, Miller, T, Brook, A, Tutton, S, Mathis, J, Georgy, B. Multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of sacroplasty in patients with osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures or pathologic sacral lesions. J Neurointerv Surg 2013; 5 (5): 461–466.Google Scholar

8. Andresen, R, Radmer, S, Lüdtke, CW, Kamusella, P, Wissgott, C, Schober, HC. Balloon sacroplasty as a palliative pain treatment in patients with metastasis-induced bone destruction and pathological fractures. Rofo 2014; 186 (9): 881–886.Google Scholar

9. Hierholzer, J, Anselmetti, G, Fuchs, H, Depriester, C, Koch, K, Pappert, D. Percutaneous osteoplasty as a treatment for painful malignant bone lesions of the pelvis and femur. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003; 14 (6): 773–777.Google Scholar

10. Kelekis, A, Lovblad, KO, Mehdizade, A, Somon, T, Yilmaz, H, Wetzel, SG, Seium, Y, Dietrich, PY, Rufenacht, DA, Martin, JB. Pelvic osteoplasty in osteolytic metastases: technical approach under fluoroscopic guidance and early clinical results. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005; 16 (1): 81–88.Google Scholar

11. Galibert, P, Deramond, H, Rosat, P, Gars, D. Le Preliminary note on the treatment of vertebral angioma by percytaneous acrylic vertebroplasty. Neurochirurgie 1987; 33: 166–168.Google Scholar

12. Masala, S, Guglielmi, G, Petrella, MC, Mastrangeli, R, Meschini, A, Anselmetti, GC, Bartolucci, DA, Mammucari, M, Manenti, G, Simonetti, G. Percutaneous ablative treatment of metastatic bone tumours: visual analogue scale scores in a short-term series. Singapore Med J 2011; 52 (3): 182–189. PMID:21451927Google Scholar

13. Munk, PL, Murphy, KJ, Gangi, A, Liu, DM. Fire and ice: percutaneous ablative therapies and cement injection in management of metastatic disease of the spine. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2011; 15 (2): 125–134. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1275595.CrossRef Google Scholar

14. Alda, T, Kamran, A. Palliative interventions for pain in cancer patients. Semin Intervent Radiol 2007; 24 (4): 419–429. doi: 10.1055/s-2007–992330.CrossRef Google Scholar

15. Lee, JH, Stein, M, Roychowdhury, S. Percutaneous treatment of a sacral metastasis with combined embolization, cryoablation, alcohol ablation and sacroplasty for local tumor and pain control. Interv Neuroradiol 2013; (2): 250–253. PMID:23693052Google Scholar

16. Huang, M, Zhu, H, Liu, T, Cui, D, Huang, Y. Comparison of external radiotherapy and percutaneous vertebroplasty for spinal metastasis. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2014; Feb 20. doi: 10.1111/ajco.12162. [Epub ahead of print]CrossRef Google Scholar

17. Orgera, G, Krokidis, M, Matteoli, M, Varano, GM, Verde, G La, David, V, Rossi, M. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain management in patients with multiple myeloma: is radiofrequency ablation necessary? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2014; 37 (1): 203–210.Google Scholar

18. Anselmetti, GC, Manca, A, Montemurro, F, Hirsch, J, Chiara, G, Grignani, G, Schianca, F Carnevale, Capaldi, A, Scalabrini, D Rota, Sardo, E, Debernardi, F, Iussich, G, Regge, D. Percutaneous vertebroplasty in multiple myeloma: prospective long-term follow-up in 106 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012; 35 (1): 139–145.Google Scholar

19. Kelekis, A, Filippiadis, DK, Martin, JB, Kelekis, NL. Aggressive vertebral hemangioma treated with combination of vertebroplasty and sclerotherapy through transpedicular and direct approach. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014; 37 (6): 1638–1642.CrossRef Google Scholar

20. Tomé-Bermejo, F, Piñera, AR, Duran-Álvarez, C, Román, B López-San, Mahillo, I, Alvarez, L. Identification of risk factors for the occurrence of cement leakage during percutaneousvertebroplasty for painful osteoporotic or malignant vertebral fracture. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014; Feb 27 [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar

21. Li, B, Li, Q, Nie, W, Liu, S. Diagnostic value of whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for detection of primary and metastatic malignancies: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83 (2): 338–344.Google Scholar

22. Martin, JB, Wetzel, SG, Seium, Y, Dietrich, PY, Somon, T, Gailloud, P, Payer, M, Kelekis, A, Ruefenacht, DA. Percutaneous vertebroplasty in metastatic disease: transpedicular access and treatment of lysed pedicles – initial experience. Radiology 2003; 229 (2): 593–597.Google Scholar

23. Mailli, L, Filippiadis, DK, Brountzos, EN, Alexopoulou, E, Kelekis, N, Kelekis, A. Clinical outcome and safety of multilevel vertebroplasty: clinical experience and results. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 36 (1): 183–191.Google Scholar

24. Filippiadis, DK, Tutton, S, Mazioti, A, Kelekis, A. Percutaneous image-guided ablation of bone and soft tissue tumours: a review of available techniques and protective measures. Insights Imaging 2014; 5 (3): 339–346.Google Scholar

25. Kelekis, AD, Martin, JB. Radicular pain after vertebroplasty: complication and prevention. Skeletal Radiol 2005; 34 (12): 816.Google Scholar

26. Kumar, N, Malviya, M, Meireles, M de. It should not be here! A strange case of pulmonary cement embolism following balloon kyphoplasty. Chest 2014; 145(3 Suppl): 559A.Google Scholar

27. Gupta, AC, Chandra, RV, Yoo, AJ, Leslie-Mazwi, TM, Bell, DL, Mehta, BP, Vanderboom, TL, Rabinov, JD, Larvie, M, Hirsch, JA. Safety and effectiveness of sacroplasty: a large single-center experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014; 35 (11): 2202–2206.CrossRef Google Scholar

28. Pereira, LP, Clarençon, F, Cormier, E, Rose, M, Jean, B, Jean, L Le, Chiras, J. Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sacroplasty: a single-centre experience in 58 consecutive patients with tumours or osteoporotic insufficient fractures treated under fluoroscopic guidance. Eur Radiol 2013; 23 (10): 2764–2772.Google Scholar

29. Kortman, K, Ortiz, O, Miller, T, Brook, A, Tutton, S, Mathis, J, Georgy, B. Multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of sacroplasty in patients with osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures or pathologic sacral lesions. J Neurointerv Surg 2013; 5 (5): 461–466.Google Scholar

30. Harrington, KD. Impending pathologic fractures from metastatic malignancy: evaluation and management. Instr Course Lect 1986; 35: 357–381.Google Scholar

31. Jaiswal, PK, Aston, WJ, Grimer, RJ, Abudu, A, Carter, S, Blunn, G, Briggs, TW, Cannon, S. Peri-acetabular resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction for tumours of the acetabulum. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008; 90 (9): 1222–1227.Google Scholar

32. Ho, L, Ahlmann, ER, Menendez, LR. Modified Harrington reconstruction for advanced periacetabular metastatic disease. J Surg Oncol 2010; 101 (2): 170–174.Google Scholar

33. Ji, T, Guo, W, Yang, RL, Tang, XD, Wang, YF. Modular hemipelvic endoprosthesis reconstruction – experience in 100 patients with mid-term follow-up results. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 39 (1): 53–60.Google Scholar

34. Gupta, AC, Hirsch, JA, Chaudhry, ZA, Chandra, RV, Pulli, B, Galinsky, JG, Hirsch, AE, Yoo, AJ. Evaluating the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous acetabuloplasty. J Neurointerv Surg 2012; 4 (2): 134–138.Google Scholar

35. Sapkota, BH, Hirsch, AE, Yoo, AJ, Hornicek, FJ, Raskin, KA, Rosenthal, DI, Growney, ML, Hirsch, JA. Treatment of metastatic carcinoma to the hip with CT-guided percutaneous acetabuloplasty: report of four cases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (4): 548–552.Google Scholar

36. Hartung, M, Neilson, JC, White, SB, King, DM, Tutton, SM. Percutaneous stabilization of metastatic disease in the acetabulum. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (3 S110).Google Scholar

37. Tsoumakidou, G, Borensztein, M, Zini, C, Garnon, J, Gangi, A. Postablation insufficiency fracture of the iliac crest: management by percutaneous screw fixation. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2014; 37: 1126–1128.Google Scholar

38. Kelekis, A, Filippiadis, D, Velonakis, G, Malagari, A, Alexopoulou, E, Brountzos, E, Kelekis, NL. Percutaneous augmented osteoplasty for the treatment of symptomatic fractures in peripheral long bones. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (4): 663.Google Scholar

39. Deschamps, F, Farouil, G, Hakime, A, Teriitehau, C, Barah, A, Baere, T. de Percutaneous stabilization of impending pathological fracture of the proximal femur. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012; 35 (6): 1428–1432.Google Scholar

40. Anselmetti, GC, Manca, A, Chiara, G, Tutton, S, Iussich, G, Gino, G, Grignani, G, Ortega, C, Moselli, N, Regge, D. Painful pathologic fracture of the humerus: percutaneous osteoplasty with bone marrow nails under hybrid computed tomography and fluoroscopic guidance. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22 (7): 1031–1034.Google Scholar

Book contents

26 - Cementoplasty and musculoskeletal interventions

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive