2017
DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.oa.16.00018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Percutaneous Palliative Surgery for Femoral Neck Metastasis Using Hollow Perforated Screw Fixation and Bone Cement

Abstract: Background:We introduced a new surgical method of percutaneous hollow perforated screw (HPS) fixation with concomitant bone-cement injection for the treatment of femoral neck metastasis and evaluated its efficacy for the palliative treatment of patients with advanced cancer.Methods:The study included 87 patients (39 men and 48 women; mean age [and standard deviation], 64.2 ± 10.2 years; mean body mass index, 24.3 ± 3.2 kg/m2) who underwent percutaneous HPS fixation and cementoplasty (mean cement amount, 19.8 ±… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“… [62] . Kim et al carried out a retrospective observational study that included 89 patients in which percutaneous hollow perforated screw (HPS) fixation combined with POP was performed as a minimally invasive technique that provides effective pain relief and early stabilization for the treatment of patients with femoral neck metastasis [63] .…”
Section: Commonly Used Minimally Invasive Treatment Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… [62] . Kim et al carried out a retrospective observational study that included 89 patients in which percutaneous hollow perforated screw (HPS) fixation combined with POP was performed as a minimally invasive technique that provides effective pain relief and early stabilization for the treatment of patients with femoral neck metastasis [63] .…”
Section: Commonly Used Minimally Invasive Treatment Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is worth noting that our study is comparable to previous research studies in this aspect, as the majority of studies on this topic also had relatively short follow-up times ranging from 8.3-10.1 months. 14,15 Fourth, Some patients were lost to follow-up without a clear reason, which limits our ability to determine if there was any disease recurrence or progression up until the end of their lives. Finally, adjuvant treatment protocols varied between patients because the types of malignancies also varied; additionally, during the 16-year period from which the data were collected, adjuvant treatment was changing and improving.…”
Section: Orthopedic Reviewsmentioning
confidence: 99%