Skip to main content

Abstract

Pelvic and sacrum bones are highly complex in shape that is why they are one of the most challenging surgeries to achieve in oncologic orthopedics. Traditional resection and reconstruction are done “freehand” that is highly inaccurate. Conventionally, surgeons rely on twodimensional images from the pelvis. In this kind of surgeries it is achieved negative but also wide resections margins to be removed with a surrounding margin of healthy tissue so as to ensure the complete resection of the tumor. The complexity of pelvic surgeries relies on the size of the tumors that use to be huge, the difficulty to access, close proximity to vital structures and multiplanar complexity. It makes impossible to design onedesignfitsall prosthesis that is why this kind of surgeries overturn to computer assisted surgery and navigated guideline because it has identifiable bony prominences to use as reference points for resection. Preoperative navigation enables physicians to explore the tumor area before the operation and learn about the possible way outs of the resection. Intraoperative navigation simplifies surgeries reducing the risk of damaging vital structures and measure depth of penetration of the instruments, guiding the surgeon within the anatomical structures during the whole procedure. Although computer navigation assisted surgery in the Pelvis is in its relative infancy it is a useful asset that results on decreasing revision rate, decreasing need of amputation and saving nerves roots.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Jeys L, Matharu GS, Nandra RS, Grimer RJ. Can computer navigation-assisted surgery reduce the risk of an intralesional margin and reduce the rate of local recurrence in patients with a tumour of the pelvis or sacrum? Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(10):1417–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wong KC, Kumta SM. Computer-assisted tumor surgery in malignant bone tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:750–61.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ottaviani G, Jaffe N. The epidemiology of osteosarcoma. In: Jaffe N, Bruland O, Bielack S, editors. Pediatric and adolescent osteosarcoma. New York: Springer; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bone Sarcomas: incidence and survival rates in England – NCIN Data Briefing. 2010. National Cancer Intelligence Network. 9 3 2014. Ref Type: Online Source.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Unni K. Dahlin’s bone tumors: general aspects and data on 11,087 cases. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mavrogenis A, Patapis P, Kostopanagiotou G, et al. Tumors of the sacrum. Orthopedics. 2009;32:342–56.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Payer M. Neurological manifestation of sacral tumors. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15:E1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Coleman R. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev. 2001;27:165–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ruggieri P, Mavrogenis A, Angelini A, et al. Metastases of the pelvis: does resection improve survival? Orthopedics. 2011;34:236–44.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wunder J, Ferguson P, Griffin A, et al. Acetabular metastases: planning for reconstruction and review of results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;415(Suppl):187–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jacofsky D, Papagelopoulos P, Sim F. Advances and challenges in the surgical treatment of metastatic bone disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;415(Suppl):14–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Du Z, Zang J, Tang XD, et al. Experts’ agreement on therapy for bone metastases. Orthop Surg. 2010;2:241–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ozaki T, Flege S, Kevric M. Osteosarcoma of the pelvis: experience of the Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:334–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fuchs B, Hoekzem N, Larson D. Osteosarcoma of the pelvis: outcome analysis of surgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:510–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Campanacci D, Chacon S, Mondanelli N, Beltrami G, Scocianti G, Caff G, Frenos F, Capanna R. Pelvic massive allograft reconstruction after bone tumor resection. Int Orthop. 2012;36(12):2529–36.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hwan S, Hyun G, Kim H, et al. Computer-assisted sacral tumor resection: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg A. 2008;90:1561–6.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cheong D, Letson G. Computer-assisted navigation and musculoskeletal sarcoma surgery. Cancer Control. 2011;18:171–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cartiaux O, Docquier P, Paul L, et al. Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study. Acta Orthop. 2008;79:695–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Amiot L, Lang K, Putzier M, et al. Comparative results between conventional and computer-assisted pedicle screw installation in the thoracic, lumbar and sacral spine. Spine. 2000;25:606–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Grutzner P, Suhm N. Computer aided long bone fracture treatment. Injury. 2004;35:57–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Anderson K, Buehler K, Markel D. Computer assisted navigation in total knee arthroplasty: comparison with conventional methods. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:132–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hufner T, Kfuri MJ, Galanski M. New indications for computer-assisted surgery: tumor resection in the pelvis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;426:219–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Krettek C, Geerling J, Bastian L, et al. Computer aided tumor resection in the pelvis. Injury. 2004;35:79–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wong K, Kumta S, Antonio G, et al. Image fusion for computer-assisted bone tumor surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2533–41.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cho HS, Kang HG, Kim HS, et al. Computer-assisted sacral tumor resection. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg. 2008;90:1561–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. So T, Lam Y, Mak K. Computer-assisted navigation in bone tumor surgery: seamless workflow model and evolution of technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2985–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jeys L, Grimer R, Carter S, et al. Outcomes of primary bone tumors of the pelvis- the ROH experience [abstract]. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] Orthop Proc. 2012;94-B:39.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lee Jeys MB, ChB, MSc (Ortho. Eng), FRCS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jeys, L., May, P.L. (2016). Bone Tumor Navigation in the Pelvis. In: Ritacco, L., Milano, F., Chao, E. (eds) Computer-Assisted Musculoskeletal Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12943-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12943-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-12942-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-12943-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics