Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Management of Bone Metastases pp 275–280Cite as

What Is New in Management of Bone Metastases

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 794 Accesses

Abstract

Metastatic tumors are the most common malignancy of the bone. Traditional management techniques involve a combination of pharmacotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgical procedures. Novel medical treatments combined with less invasive surgical procedures can offer an effective palliative option in patients with limited life expectancy. Denosumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL), was found to be a promising new therapeutic strategy for patients with bone metastases by restricting bone destruction. However, the scientific community should be aware of the possible association of denosumab treatment with occurrence of new malignancies.

Advancements in surgical techniques have led to the development of the concept of less invasive surgical procedures with the aim of achieving the same clinical results with less morbidity related to the surgical approach. Less invasive procedures include the following: endoscopic surgery, computer-assisted surgery, and minimally invasive percutaneous surgery. Benefits of less invasive techniques include decreased blood loss, less postoperative pain, and shortened recovery time. Less invasive procedures also allow earlier initiation of postoperative adjuvant treatments. Considering the limited expectancy of most patients with bone metastases, the main goal of novel medical and surgical treatments is to improve the quality of life of patients with bone metastases reducing the adverse effects related to the traditional medical or surgical treatments.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cheung FH. The practicing orthopedic surgeon’s guide to managing long bone metastases. Orthop Clin North Am. 2014;45:109–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2013.09.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber KL, Randall RL, Grossman S, Parvizi J. Management of lower-extremity bone metastasis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(Suppl 4):11–9. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00635.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coleman RE. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:6243s–9s. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0931.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schulman KL, Kohles J. Economic burden of metastatic bone disease in the U.S. Cancer. 2007;109:2334–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Errani C, Mavrogenis AF, Cevolani L, et al. Treatment for long bone metastases based on a systematic literature review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017;27:205–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-016-1857-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ratasvuori M, Wedin R, Hansen BH, et al. Prognostic role of en-bloc resection and late onset of bone metastasis in patients with bone-seeking carcinomas of the kidney, breast, lung, and prostate: SSG study on 672 operated skeletal metastases. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110:360–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.23654.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Forsberg JA, Eberhardt J, Boland PJ, et al. Estimating survival in patients with operable skeletal metastases: an application of a Bayesian belief network. PLoS One. 2011;6:e19956. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019956.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Zheng GZ, Chang B, Lin FX, et al. Meta-analysis comparing denosumab and zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced solid tumours. Eur J Cancer Care. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12541.

  9. Henry DH, Costa L, Goldwasser F, et al. Randomized, double-blind study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced cancer (excluding breast and prostate cancer) or multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1125–32. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.31.3304.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen F, Pu F. Safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in patients with bone metastases: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Oncol Res Treat. 2016;39:453–9. https://doi.org/10.1159/000447372.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Criscitiello C, Viale G, Gelao L, et al. Crosstalk between bone niche and immune system: osteoimmunology signaling as a potential target for cancer treatment. Cancer Treat Rev. 2015;41:61–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2014.12.001.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Errani C, Traina F, Chehrassan M, et al. Minimally invasive technique for curettage of chondroblastoma using endoscopic technique. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18:3394–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Campos WK, Gasbarrini A, Boriani S. Case report: curetting osteoid osteoma of the spine using combined video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and navigation. Clin Orthop. 2013;471:680–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2725-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenthal D. Endoscopic approaches to the thoracic spine. Eur Spine J. 2000;9(Suppl 1):S8–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Martins C, Cardoso AC, Alencastro LF, et al. Endoscopic-assisted lateral transatlantal approach to craniovertebral junction. World Neurosurg. 2010;74:351–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2010.05.037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Le Huec JC, Lesprit E, Guibaud JP, et al. Minimally invasive endoscopic approach to the cervicothoracic junction for vertebral metastases: report of two cases. Eur Spine J. 2001;10:421–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Young PS, Bell SW, Mahendra A. The evolving role of computer-assisted navigation in musculoskeletal oncology. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:258–64. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.97B2.34461.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wong KC, Kumta SM. Computer-assisted tumor surgery in malignant bone tumors. Clin Orthop. 2013;471:750–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2557-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Loblaw DA, Perry J, Chambers A, Laperriere NJ. Systematic review of the diagnosis and management of malignant extradural spinal cord compression: the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative’s Neuro-Oncology Disease Site Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2028–37. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.00.067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee C-H, Kwon J-W, Lee J, et al. Direct decompressive surgery followed by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a meta-analysis. Spine. 2014;39:E587–92. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim D-Y, Lee S-H, Chung SK, Lee H-Y. Comparison of multifidus muscle atrophy and trunk extension muscle strength: percutaneous versus open pedicle screw fixation. Spine. 2005;30:123–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Veeravagu A, Patil CG, Lad SP, Boakye M. Risk factors for postoperative spinal wound infections after spinal decompression and fusion surgeries. Spine. 2009;34:1869–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181adc989.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kwan MK, Lee CK, Chan CYW. Minimally invasive spinal stabilization using fluoroscopic-guided percutaneous screws as a form of palliative surgery in patients with spinal metastasis. Asian Spine J. 2016;10:99–110. https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2016.10.1.99.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Rao PJ, Thayaparan GK, Fairhall JM, Mobbs RJ. Minimally invasive percutaneous fixation techniques for metastatic spinal disease. Orthop Surg. 2014;6:187–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12114.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Zairi F, Arikat A, Allaoui M, et al. Minimally invasive decompression and stabilization for the management of thoracolumbar spine metastasis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17:19–23. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.4.SPINE111108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Versteeg AL, Verlaan J-J, de Baat P, et al. Complications after percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for the treatment of unstable spinal metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:2343–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5156-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Shim CS, Lee S-H, Jung B, et al. Fluoroscopically assisted percutaneous translaminar facet screw fixation following anterior lumbar interbody fusion: technical report. Spine. 2005;30:838–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nathan SS, Healey JH, Mellano D, et al. Survival in patients operated on for pathologic fracture: implications for end-of-life orthopedic care. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6072–82. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.08.104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic Service, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy

    Costantino Errani & Davide Maria Donati

Authors
  1. Costantino Errani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Davide Maria Donati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Costantino Errani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Vincenzo Denaro

  2. Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, University Campus Bio-Medico of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Alberto Di Martino

  3. General Direction of Health Program, National Ministry of Health of Italy, Rome, Italy

    Andrea Piccioli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Errani, C., Donati, D.M. (2019). What Is New in Management of Bone Metastases. In: Denaro, V., Di Martino, A., Piccioli, A. (eds) Management of Bone Metastases. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73485-9_26

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73485-9_26

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73484-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73485-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation