The primary report of percutaneous polymethyl methacrylate cementoplasty in osteolytic metastases of the pelvis and peripheral bone / 中华放射学杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective To propose a technique and treatment of percutaneous polymethyl methacrylate(PMMA) cementoplasty for painful metastatic lesions of the pelvis, humerus, and tibia. Methods Percutaneous PMMA cementoplasty was performed in 24 cases, including the lesions of S1 in 9 cases, acetabulum in 7 cases, ischium in 5 cases, humerus in 2 cases, and tibia in 1 case. There were 26 local lesions. The puncture approach was performed under fluoroscopic guidance. The S1 vertebral body puncture was performed with lateral transsacroiliac joint approach. The needle progression was controlled in the anteroposterior projection with a needle course above the level of the S1 foramen. With the needle adjacent to the S1 vertebral body edge, the needle tip should center just in front of the spinal canal in the lateral fluoroscopic projection. The acetabular roof puncture was performed with lateral approach. The needle progression was controlled in the anteroposterior and lateral projections alternately with a needle course parallel to the body axial plane. The puncture needle arrived directly at the lesions. The puncture to the ischium was from ischium tubercle to the lesions. The puncture progression to the internal compartment of the acetabulum was with the trajectory of the needle from the ischium tubercle to the lesion. The puncture progression to the humerus should avoid conflicting with the radial nerve and upper extremity vessels. The needle course should be from the dorsal upper arm to the lesions. As for the lesions of the tibia, the needle was punctured from the front of tibia to the lesion. After the needle tip placement in the lesions, PMMA in paste condition was injected with the precession injector pressure device under continuous visual control with adequate filling and avoidance of important PMMA leakage. Results Partial or complete pain relief was obtained in all 24 patients (CR in 10 cases, PR in 14 cases) within 7 days after the operation. Clinical improvement was maintained in 23 patients at the follow-up of 2-7 months. One patient with lesion of humerus re-experienced severe pain in local area of PMMA injection 27 days after the operation when he got up by using the treated arm for the support of the body weight. The condition was considered as the fracture at the cement-bone interface, and the gradual pain relief was obtained in 2 days with the external fixation of plaster for limiting the motion of the treated arm, and the complete relief maintained. There was PMMA leakage in 2 cases without corresponding clinical importance. Conclusion The technique and treatment of percutaneous PMMA cementoplasty in osteolytic metastases of the pelvis and peripheral bone was safe and effective. Considering the incidence of the potential fracture, the external fixation for motion limitation should be given after PMMA injection to extremity lesions.