Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A novel three-dimensional-printed patient-specific sacral implant for spinopelvic reconstruction in sacral giant cell tumour

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Spinopelvic reconstruction after sacral tumour resection is one of the most demanding procedures in sacral tumour surgery. The aims of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of spinopelvic reconstruction with 3D-printed prostheses in sacral giant cell tumours and the clinical outcomes and complications at follow-up.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed ten consecutive patients with giant cell tumors of the sacrum who underwent intralesional nerve-sparing resection with curative intent and custom implant reconstruction between 2016 and 2021. There were four males and six females with a mean age of 40.2 years (range, 25–62 years) at surgery. A computer-aided-design implant was prepared using 3D printing technology that was both matched to the bone defect and biomechanically evaluated. A 3D-printed surgical guide was used to replicate the resection procedure as planned. We analyzed operational outcomes, oncological outcomes, functional outcomes, complications, and prosthetic outcomes. Pain at rest was assessed according to a 10-cm VAS score. The results of functional improvement were evaluated using the MSTS-93 score at the final follow-up.

Results

All patients were observed for 26 to 61 months, with an average follow-up of 43.8 months. No deep infection or prosthetic structural failure occurred in this study. A total of 80% of patients had good neurological function and normal urinary, bowel, and ambulatory functions. The mean MSTS score was 24.1 (range, 22–26). The mean VAS score was 2 (range 0 to 2). Delayed wound healing occurred in three patients, and the wounds healed after debridement. One case had local recurrence and survived tumour-free after resection of the recurrent lesion. An aseptic loosening was found in a patient that did not require secondary surgery. By radiographical assessments, we found that 90% of implants were well osseointegrated at the final follow-up examination.

Conclusions

The 3D-printed sacral implants might provide a promising strategy for spinopelvic reconstruction in sacral giant cell tumours undergoing intralesional nerve-sparing surgery with satisfactory clinical outcomes, osseointegration, and excellent durability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Bukata SV, Blay JY, Rutkowski P et al (2021) Denosumab treatment for giant cell tumor of the spine including the sacrum. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 46(5):277–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Thangaraj R, Grimer RJ, Carter SR, Stirling AJ, Spilsbury J, Spooner D (2010) Giant cell tumour of the sacrum: a suggested algorithm for treatment. Eur Spine J 19:1189–1194

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang J, Du Z, Yang R, Tang X, Yan T, Guo W (2020) Analysis of clinical outcome for adolescent patients undergoing conservative nerve-sparing surgery based on the proposed resection classification for sacral giant cell tumor. J Clin Neurosci 80:23–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Reynolds JJ, Khundkar R, Boriani S et al (2016) Soft tissue and bone defect management in total sacrectomy for primary sacral tumors: a systematic review with expert recommendations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(Suppl 20):S199–S204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tang X, Yang R, Qu H, Cai Z, Guo W (2018) Factors associated with spinopelvic fixation mechanical failure after total sacrectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43(18):1268–1274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bederman SS, Shah KN, Hassan JM, Hoang BH, Kiester PD, Bhatia NN (2014) Surgical techniques for spinopelvic reconstruction following total sacrectomy: a systematic review. Eur Spine J 23:305–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tong Y, Kaplan DJ, Spivak JM, Bendo JA (2020) Three-dimensional printing in spine surgery: a review of current applications. Spine J 20:833–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chatain GP, Finn M (2020) Compassionate use of a custom 3D-printed sacral implant for revision of failing sacrectomy: case report. J Neurosurg Spine 33(4):513–518. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.3.SPINE191497

  9. Kim D, Lim JY, Shim KW, Han JW, Yi S, Yoon DH, Kim KN, Ha Y, Ji GY, Shin DA (2017) Sacral reconstruction with a 3D-printed implant after hemisacrectomy in a patient with sacral osteosarcoma: 1-year follow-up result. Yonsei Med J 58:453–457

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Wei R, Guo W, Yang R, Tang X, Yang Y, Ji T, Liang H (2019) Reconstruction of the pelvic ring after total en bloc sacrectomy using a 3D-printed sacral endoprosthesis with re-establishment of spinopelvic stability: a retrospective comparative study. Bone Joint J 101-B:880–888

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wei R, Guo W, Ji T, Zhang Y, Liang H (2017) One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, custom-made prosthesis after total en bloc sacrectomy: a technical note. Eur Spine J 26:1902–1909

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lv ZR, Li ZF, Yang ZP, Li X, Yang Q, Li K, Li J (2020) One-step reconstruction with a novel suspended, modular, and 3D-printed total sacral implant resection of sacral giant cell tumor with preservation of bilateral S(1–3) nerve roots via a posterior-only approach. Orthop Surg 12:58–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Domovitov SV, Chandhanayingyong C, Boland PJ, McKeown DG, Healey JH (2016) Conservative surgery in the treatment of giant cell tumor of the sacrum: 35 years’ experience. J Neurosurg Spine 24:228–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hugate RR Jr, Dickey ID, Phimolsarnti R, Yaszemski MJ, Sim FH (2006) Mechanical effects of partial sacrectomy: when is reconstruction necessary. Clin Orthop Relat Res 450:82–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Allen BL Jr, Ferguson RL (1984) The Galveston technique of pelvic fixation with L-rod instrumentation of the spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 9:388–394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Peng L, Wang P, Jiang W, Cheng C, Zuo W, Qu Y, Li W (2020) Reconstruction with a 3D-printed prosthesis and internal fixation with novel four-rod technique after en bloc resection of meningiomas in the lumbosacral region (L5–S3) without rectum/bladder function sacrifice: technical case report. Turk Neurosurg 30:632–635

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Paredes SR, Smigielski M, Stalley PD, Lee PJ (2022) Pelvic exenteration with high sacrectomy and reconstruction with 3D-printed prosthesis for recurrent sacral chordoma. ANZ J Surg. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.17952

  18. Angelini A, Trovarelli G, Berizzi A, Pala E, Breda A, Ruggieri P (2019) Three-dimension-printed custom-made prosthetic reconstructions: from revision surgery to oncologic reconstructions. Int Orthop 43:123–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wang B, Hao Y, Pu F, Jiang W, Shao Z (2018) Computer-aided designed, three dimensional-printed hemipelvic prosthesis for peri-acetabular malignant bone tumour. Int Orthop 42:687–694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wang J, Min L, Lu M, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Luo Y, Zhou Y, Duan H, Tu C (2020) What are the complications of three-dimensionally printed, custom-made, integrative hemipelvic endoprostheses in patients with primary malignancies involving the acetabulum, and what is the function of these patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 478:2487–2501

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Li D, Guo W, Qu H et al (2013) Experience with wound complications after surgery for sacral tumors. Eur Spine J 22(9):2069–2076

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Lim CY, Liu X, He F, Liang H, Yang Y, Ji T, Yang R, Guo W (2020) Retrospective cohort study of 68 sacral giant cell tumours treated with nerve-sparing surgery and evaluation on therapeutic benefits of denosumab therapy. Bone Joint J 102-B:177–185

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guo W, Ji T, Tang X, Yang Y (2009) Outcome of conservative surgery for giant cell tumor of the sacrum. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:1025–1031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Liang H, Liu X, Yang Y et al (2022) Ultra-short course of neo-adjuvant denosumab for nerve-sparing surgery for giant cell tumor of bone in sacrum. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 47(9):691–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kato I, Furuya M, Matsuo K, Kawabata Y, Tanaka R, Ohashi K (2018) Giant cell tumours of bone treated with denosumab: histological, immunohistochemical and H3F3A mutation analyses. Histopathology 72:914–922

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Xiang F, Liu H, Deng J, Ma W, Chen Y (2022) Progress on denosumab use in giant cell tumor of bone: dose and duration of therapy. Cancers (Basel) 14(23):5758. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14235758

  27. Hashimoto K, Nishimura S, Miyamoto H, Toriumi K, Ikeda T, Akagi M (2022) Comprehensive treatment outcomes of giant cell tumor of the spine: a retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 101:e29963

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants who volunteered in this study.

Funding

This research was funded by the Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, grant number ZR2021MH114.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, China

    ZhaoRui Lv, Jianmin Li, ZhiPing Yang, Xin Li, Qiang Yang & ZhenFeng Li

  2. Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, China

    ZhaoRui Lv

Authors
  1. ZhaoRui Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianmin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. ZhiPing Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qiang Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. ZhenFeng Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Zhenfeng Li, Zhaorui Lv, and Jianmin Li. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Zhaorui Lv, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to ZhenFeng Li.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Qilu Hospital of Shandong University (protocol code 2015087 and approved on December 28, 2015).

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figs. 1 and 4.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (MP4 44675 KB)

Supplementary file2 (MP4 49421 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lv, Z., Li, J., Yang, Z. et al. A novel three-dimensional-printed patient-specific sacral implant for spinopelvic reconstruction in sacral giant cell tumour. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 47, 1619–1628 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-023-05759-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-023-05759-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation