Advertisement

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 33, Issue 6, pp 1270–1277 | Cite as

Sacroplasty for Local or Massive Localization of Multiple Myeloma

  • Antonio BasileEmail author
  • Dimitrios Tsetis
  • Maide Cavalli
  • Paolo Fiumara
  • Francesco Di Raimondo
  • Francesco Coppolino
  • Carmelo Coppolino
  • Elena Mundo
  • Carla Desiderio
  • Antonio Granata
  • Maria Teresa Patti
Case Report

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of cementoplasty in the treatment of sacral multiple myelomas. We retrospectively reviewed the records of eight patients (four women and four men; age range 47–68 years; mean age 57.8) who underwent cementoplasty for painful osteolytic localization of multiple myeloma between April 2007 and May 2009. The patients had difficulty walking because of increasing pain. Six patients had persistent pain despite other cementoplasties for vertebral and femoral localization, whereas two patients referred at the time of diagnosis had only sacral lesions. The clinical indication for treatment was (1) a pain intensity score ≥5 on visual analogue scale (VAS) and (2) pain totally or partially refractory to analgesic treatment in patients with a life expectancy >3 months. Technical planning was based on computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging. Six patients had previously undergone radiotherapy or chemotherapy and were receiving varying doses of analgesics, whereas sacroplasty represented the first treatment for two patients. Five patients had monolateral local involvement, and the other patients had massive involvement of the sacrum; Technical success was achieved in all cases. We had only one small and asymptomatic foraminal leak. All patients experienced improvement in symptoms after the procedure, as demonstrated by improved VAS scores and performance status (PS) and decreased analgesic dose constant during follow-up. In our experience, percutaneous stabilization can be used effectively and safely in patients with focal or extensive involvement of the sacrum by multiple myeloma.

Keywords

Multiple myeloma Cementoplasty Sacrum 

References

  1. 1.
    Frey ME, DePalma MJ, Cifu DX et al (2007) Efficacy and safety of percutaneous sacroplasty for painful osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures: a prospective, multicenter trial. Spine 32:1635–1640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garant M (2002) Sacroplasty: a new treatment for sacral insufficiency fracture. J Vasc Interv Radiol 13:1265–1267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pommersheim W, Huang-Hellinger F, Baker M et al (2003) Sacroplasty: a treatment for sacral insufficiency fractures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 24:1003–1071PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brien JP, Sims JT, Evans AJ (2000) Vertebroplasty in patients with severe vertebral compression fractures: a technical report. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:1555–15587Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amar AP, Larsen DW, Esnaashari N et al (2001) Percutaneous transpedicular PMMA vertebroplasty for the treatment of spinal compression fractures. Neurosurgery 49(5):1105–1115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anselmetti GC, Manca A, Ortega C et al (2008) Treatment of extraspinal painful bone metastases with percutaneous cementoplasty: a prospective study of 50 patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31:1165–1173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoffmann RT, Jakobs TF, Trumm C et al (2008) Radiofrequency ablation in combination with osteoplasty in the treatment of painful metastatic bone disease. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19:419–425CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Basile A, Giuliano G, Scuderi V et al (2008) Cementoplasty in the management of painful extraspinal bone metastases: our experience. Radiol Med 113:1018–1028CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dehdashti AR, Martin JB, Jean B et al (2000) PMMA cementoplasty in symptomatic metastatic lesions of the S1 vertebral body. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 23:235–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hierholzer J, Anselmetti G, Fuchs H et al (2003) Percutaneous osteoplasty as a treatment for painful malignant bone lesions of the pelvis and femur. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14:773–777PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uemura A, Matsusako M, Numaguchi Y et al (2005) Percutaneous sacroplasty for haemorrhagic metastases for hepatocellular carcinoma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 26:493–495PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Butler CL, Given CA II, Michel SJ et al (2005) Percutaneous sacroplasty for the treatment of sacral insufficiency fractures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:195Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Masala S, Konda D, Massari F et al (2006) Sacroplasty and iliac osteoplasty under combined CT and fluoroscopic guidance. Spine 31:E667–E669CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wee B, Shimal A, Stirling AJ, James SLJ (2008) CT-guided sacroplasty in advanced sacral destruction secondary to tumour infiltration. Clin Radiol 63:906–912CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Basile
    • 1
    Email author
  • Dimitrios Tsetis
    • 2
  • Maide Cavalli
    • 3
  • Paolo Fiumara
    • 3
  • Francesco Di Raimondo
    • 3
  • Francesco Coppolino
    • 4
  • Carmelo Coppolino
    • 1
    • 4
  • Elena Mundo
    • 5
  • Carla Desiderio
    • 1
  • Antonio Granata
    • 6
  • Maria Teresa Patti
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyOspedale Ferrarotto, via Citelli 6CataniaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, University Hospital of HeraklionMedical School of CreteHeraklionGreece
  3. 3.Department of HaematologyOspedale Ferrarotto, via Citelli 6CataniaItaly
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyPoliclinico P. GiacconePalermoItaly
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyOspedale GaribaldiCataniaItaly
  6. 6.Department of NephrologyOspedale Vittorio Emanuele, via Plebiscito 125CataniaItaly

Personalised recommendations