Comparison of the prognosis of replanting with cryoinactivation and reconstruction with allogeneic grafts for primary malignant bone tumors of the extremities
10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20241023-00582
- VernacularTitle:四肢骨干原发恶性骨肿瘤切除术后冷冻灭活再植与异体移植物重建
- Author:
Zhuoyu LI
1
;
Daoyang FAN
;
Haoyu GUO
;
Jilong ZHAO
;
Yuan LI
;
Qing ZHANG
;
Xiaohui NIU
;
Weifeng LIU
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京积水潭医院骨肿瘤科，北京 100035
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Intercalary biological reconstruction;
Allograft;
Frozen autograft inactivation;
Graft survival;
Complications
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2025;45(10):662-669
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the clinical efficacy of liquid nitrogen cryopreservation and reimplantation versus allograft reconstruction in patients underwent resection of primary malignant bone tumors of the long bones of the extremities.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted on 144 patients who underwent resection of primary malignant bone tumors of the long bones of the extremities followed by either liquid nitrogen cryopreservation and reimplantation or massive allografts reconstruction at the Beijing Jishuitan Hospital affiliated with Capital Medical University from January 2012 to July 2023. The study included 82 males and 62 females, with an average age of 23.8±12.3 years (range, 6-64 years). Patients were divided into two groups based on the reconstruction method: the cryopreservation and reimplantation group (72 cases) and the allograft group (72 cases). The following outcomes were recorded during follow-up: local tumor recurrence, bone union, union time, graft survival, and reasons for graft removal. Graft-related complications were recorded using the modified Henderson classification system of the International Limb Salvage Association. Limb function was assessed at the last follow-up using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score (MSTS-93).Results:All patients completed surgery and were followed up for a mean of 60.2±32.1 months (range, 12-149 months). At the last follow-up, 24 patients were dead from the tumor, 16 patients survived with the tumor (2 cases of local recurrence and 14 cases of distant metastasis), and 104 patients survived without the tumor. The bone union rate and union time in cryopreservation and reimplantation group were 90% (65/72) and 9.6±4.8 months, respectively, which was significantly superior to those in allograft group [68% (49/72) and 15.9±6.7 months, P<0.05]. The 5-year overall graft survival rate was 86.8% [95% CI (80.1%, 95.7%)] in cryopreservation and reimplantation group, higher than 73.2% [95% CI(68.4%, 84.5%)] in allograft group significantly (χ 2=7.122, P=0.017). The rates of graft removal due to non-union and infection in the cryopreservation and reimplantation group were 0% (0/72) and 1.4% (1/72), respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the allograft group [5.6% (4/72) and 9.7% (7/72), P<0.05]. Overall, 48.6% (70/144) of patients experienced at least one graft-related complication, with a complication rate of 33.3% in cryopreservation and reimplantation group, lower than the 61.1% in allograft group significantly (χ 2=11.146, P<0.001). The complications with the highest incidence rate were nonunion (20.8%, 30/144), followed by structural failure (17.4%, 25/144), tumor progression (10.4%, 15/144), infection (10.4%, 15/144), and soft tissue failure (5.6%, 8/144). The incidence rates of the atrophic non-union and the structural failure of grafts were 9.7% (7/72) and 1.4% (1/72) respectively in the cryopreservation and reimplantation group, which were significantly lower compared to the allograft group [29.2% (21/72) and 13.9% (10/72), P<0.05]. At the last follow-up, the MSTS-93 score was 89.7%±8.3% in the cryopreservation and reimplantation group, and 87.6%±7.5% in the allograft group, with no statistically significant difference ( t=0.326, P=0.542). Conclusion:Compared with allograft reconstruction, autologous inactivated bone grafting demonstrated superior bone union efficiency and fewer complications, it may be considered for reconstruction in cases whose tumor bone is not severely osteolytic or pathologically fractured.
