Proximal fibula resection in the treatment of bone tumours
- 200 Downloads
Background and objectives
We present a large study of patients with proximal fibula resection. Moreover we describe a new classification system for tumour resection of the proximal fibula independent of the tumour differentiation.
In 57 patients the functional and clinical outcomes were evaluated. The follow-up ranged between six months and 22.2 years (median 7.2 years). The indication for surgery was benign tumours in ten cases and malignant tumours in 47 cases. In 13 of 45 patients, where a resection of the lateral ligament complex was done, knee instability occurred. In 32 patients a resection of the peroneal nerve with resulting peroneal palsy was necessary.
Patients with peroneal resection had significantly worse functional outcome than patients without peroneal resection. An ankle foot orthosis was tolerated well by these patients. Three of four patients with pathological tibia fracture had local radiation therapy. There was no higher risk of tibia fracture in patients with partial tibial resection.
Resection of tumours in the proximal fibula can cause knee instability, peroneal palsy and in cases of local radiation therapy, a higher risk of delayed wound healing and fracture. Despite the risks of proximal fibula resection, good functional results can be achieved.
KeywordsPeroneal Nerve Lateral Collateral Ligament Biceps Tendon Wide Resection Common Peroneal Nerve
- 1.Dahlin DC, Unni KK (1986) Bone tumors, general aspects and data on 8542 cases, 4th edn. Thomas, SpringfieldGoogle Scholar
- 2.Huvos AG (1991) Bone tumor. Diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis, 2nd edn. WB Saunders, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 9.Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Delling G, Exner GU, Flege S, Helmke K, Kotz R, Salzer-Kuntschik M, Werner M, Winkelmann W, Zoubek A, Jurgens H, Winkler K (2002) Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: An analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols. J Clin Oncol 20(3):776–790PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar