CAOS in Bone Tumor Surgery

Chapter

Abstract

Wide local resection with an adequate margin is a crucial step in the management of patients with bone sarcoma. Inaccurate resection with an inadequate margin is associated with a high risk of local recurrence and poor patient survival. Orthopedic oncologist surgeons are often faced with the dilemma of how much normal tissue to preserve to retain good function without compromising an adequate margin. With the advent of medical imaging and computer technology, tumor surgeons are increasingly using computer-assisted surgery for bone tumor resection. Computer-assisted orthopedic surgery helps surgeons replicate their preoperative plans, and this improved accuracy may have clinical benefits. This chapter provides an overview of the techniques that have emerged in bone tumor surgery over the past decade, including (1) three-dimensional (3D) surgical planning, intraoperative navigation-assisted resection, and patient-specific instrumentation (PSI)-assisted bone tumor resection, (2) clinical indications and early results of these techniques, and (3) possible future developments. The workflow includes 3D surgical planning with fusion of preoperative computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging results and the integration of digital data for computer-aided design tumor implants or allografts. Computer navigation and PSI are the tools needed to implement 3D surgical planning. The current indications for computer-assisted tumor surgery (CATS) in patients with bone tumors include the following: (1) pelvic and sacral tumors that are at anatomically complex locations with nearby vital structures; (2) technically demanding resections, such as joint-preserving operations or multiplanar tumor resections; and (3) resections that must accommodate a custom tumor implant or match an allograft for reconstruction. The early clinical results suggest that the technique is feasible and safe, and it improves surgical accuracy. Nevertheless, surgeons must be aware of the potential errors when using the technique. An all-in-one planning platform for all users and the integration of 3D printing technology into the CATS workflow are potential areas for future development. Larger studies with longer follow-up periods are essential to determine the real clinical efficacy of the technique.

Keywords

Computer navigation Patient-specific instruments 3D surgical planning Computer-assisted tumor surgery (CATS) Image fusion Computer-aided design (CAD) prosthesis 

Notes

Declaration of Conflict of Interest

The author, Kwok Chuen Wong, declares that there are no conflicts of interest. The Stryker, Materialise, and Stanmore Implants companies did not fund or sponsor this research in any way.

References

  1. 1.
    Picci P, Sangiorgi L, Rougraff BT, Neff JR, Casadei R, et al. Relationship of chemotherapy-induced necrosis and surgical margins to local recurrence in osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2699–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cartiaux O, Docquier PL, Paul L, Francq BG, Cornu OH, Delloye C, et al. Surgical inaccuracy of tumor resection and reconstruction within the pelvis: an experimental study. Acta Orthop. 2008;79(5):695–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Krettek C, Geerling J, Bastian L, Citak M, Rücker F, Kendoff D, Hüfner T. Computer aided tumor resection in the pelvis. Injury. 2004;35(Suppl 1):S-A79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hüfner T, Kfuri M Jr, Galanski M, Bastian L, Loss M, Pohlemann T, Krettek C. New indications for computer-assisted surgery: tumor resection in the pelvis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;426:219–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Chiu KH, et al. Precision tumour resection and reconstruction using image-guided computer navigation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:943–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Chiu KH, Cheung KW, Leung KS, Unwin P, Wong MC. Computer assisted pelvic tumor resection and reconstruction with a custom-made prosthesis using an innovative adaptation and its validation. Comput Aided Surg. 2007;12(4):225–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aponte-Tinao LA, Ritacco LE, Ayerza MA, Muscolo DL, Farfalli GL. Multiplanar osteotomies guided by navigation in chondrosarcoma of the knee. Orthopedics. 2013;36(3):e325–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ritacco LE, Milano FE, Farfalli GL, Ayerza MA, Muscolo DL, Aponte-Tinao LA. Accuracy of 3-D planning and navigation in bone tumor resection. Orthopedics. 2013;36(7):e942–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Antonio GE, Tse LF. Image fusion for computer-assisted bone tumor surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2533–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Leung KS, Ng KW, Ng EW, Lee KS. Integration of CAD/CAM planning into computer assisted orthopaedic surgery. Comput Aided Surg. 2010;15:65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM. Joint-preserving tumor resection and reconstruction using image-guided computer navigation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(3):762–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Docquier PL, Paul L, Cartiaux O, Delloye C, Banse X. Computer-assisted resection and reconstruction of pelvic tumor sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2010;2010:125162.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/125152. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gerbers JG, Ooijen PM, Jutte PC. Computer-assisted surgery for allograft shaping in hemicortical resection: a technical note involving 4 cases. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(2):224–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aponte-Tinao L, Ritacco LE, Ayerza MA, Muscolo DL, Albergo JI, Farfalli GL. Does intraoperative navigation assistance improve bone tumor resection and allograft reconstruction results? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(3):796–804.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3604-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cho HS, Oh JH, Han I, Kim HS. The outcomes of navigation assisted bone tumour surgery: minimum three-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94(10):1414–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM. Computer-assisted tumor surgery in malignant bone tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(3):750–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    So TY, Lam YL, Mak KL. Computer-assisted navigation in bone tumor surgery: seamless workflow model and evolution of technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(11):2985–91.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1465-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ieguchi M, Hoshi M, Takada J, Hidaka N, Nakamura H. Navigation-assisted surgery for bone and soft tissue tumors with bony extension. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:275–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li J, Wang Z, Guo Z, Chen GJ, Yang M, Pei GX. Irregular osteotomy in limb salvage for juxta-articular osteosarcoma under computer-assisted navigation. J Surg Oncol. 2012;106(4):411–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Farfalli GL, Albergo JI, Ritacco LE, Ayerza MA, Milano FE, Aponte-Tinao LA. What is the expected learning curve in computer-assisted navigation for bone tumor resection? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475:668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wong KC. 3D-printed patient-specific applications in orthopaedics. Orthopaedic Res Rev. 2016;8:57–66. dx.doi.org.  https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S99614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wong KC, Sze KY, Wong IO, Wong CM, Kumta SM. Patient-specific instrument can achieve same accuracy with less resection time than navigation assistance in periacetabular pelvic tumor surgery: a cadaveric study. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11(2):307–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-015-1250-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gouin F, Paul L, Odri GA, Cartiaux O. Computer-assisted planning and patient-specific instruments for bone tumor resection within the pelvis: a series of 11 patients. Sarcoma. 2014;9:842709.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Sze KY, Wong CM. Use of a patient-specific CAD/CAM surgical jig in extremity bone tumor resection and custom prosthetic reconstruction. Comput Aided Surg. 2012;17(6):284–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Geel NV, Demol J. One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, biomechanically evaluated custom implant after complex pelvic tumor resection. Comput Aided Surg. 2015;20(1):14–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wong KC, Kumta SM. Use of computer navigation in orthopedic oncology. Curr Surg Rep. 2014;2:47. ReviewCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yang YK, Chan CM, Zhang Q, Xu HR, Niu XH. Computer navigation-aided resection of sacral chordomas. Chin Med J (Engl). 2016;129(2):162–8.  https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.173465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cho HS, Oh JH, Han I, Kim HS. Joint-preserving limb salvage surgery under navigation guidance. J Surg Oncol. 2009;100(3):227–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Outani H, Hamada K, Takenaka S, Imura Y, Oshima K, Sotobori T, Naka N, Araki N, Yoshikawa H, Myoui A. Radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteoma using a three-dimensional navigation system. J Orthop Sci. 2016;21(5):678–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2016.05.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Saidi K. Potential use of computer navigation in the treatment of primary benign and malignant tumors in children. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2012;5(2):83–90.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-012-9124-0. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Orthopaedic Oncology, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Prince of Wales HospitalThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong Kong, SARChina

Personalised recommendations