Skip to main content
Log in

Management ossärer Komplikationen des Multiplen Myeloms

Management of osseous complications in multiple myeloma

  • Schwerpunkt: Multiples Myelom
  • Published:
Der Internist Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Beim Multiplen Myelom verursachen skeletale Läsionen häufig Schmerzen, pathologische Frakturen, spinale Instabilitäten sowie eine Kompression des Myelons und der Nervenwurzeln. Die Auswahl der Therapieoptionen erfolgt individuell anhand von Komorbiditäten, Prognose, Lokalisation und Anzahl der Läsionen interdisziplinär mit Onkologen und Strahlentherapeuten. Die chirurgische Therapie nimmt eine supportive Stellung ein und dient der Schmerzlinderung, der Vermeidung und Behandlung pathologischer Frakturen und der Dekompression des Myelons und der Nervenwurzeln. Eine adäquate präoperative Diagnostik ist essenziell für die Planung der operativen Therapie. Sie beinhaltet eine Schnittbildgebung mit Magnetresonanztomographie an der Wirbelsäule. Bei instabilen Wirbelsäulenmetastasen sind minimal-invasive und offene Operationsverfahren sowie deren Kombination zur Stabilisierung und Dekompression verfügbar. Bei instabilen Metastasen und pathologischen Frakturen des Extremitätenskeletts sind operative Verfahren der konservativen Therapie in Bezug auf die Schmerzlinderung sowie die Wiederherstellung der Stabilität, Gehfähigkeit und Funktion der Extremität deutlich überlegen. Hier stehen die Verbundosteosynthese mit Knochenzement, Platten und intramedullären Nägeln sowie der Knochenersatz durch Implantate und Tumorendoprothesen mit guten funktionellen Ergebnissen zur Verfügung. Es sollte immer eine dauerhafte Rekonstruktion angestrebt werden. Bei den seltenen solitären Plasmozytomen sollte die Indikation einer kurativen weiten Resektion des Tumors in Betracht gezogen werden. Die adjuvante Strahlentherapie führt zu einer deutlich verbesserten lokalen Tumorkontrolle und sollte bei allen Resektionen und Stabilisierungen durchgeführt werden.

Abstract

Skeletal lesions caused by multiple myeloma often lead to pain, pathological fractures, spinal instability, and compression of the spinal cord and nerve roots. The choice of therapy options is made by an interdisciplinary basis with oncologists and radiotherapists on the basis of comorbidities, prognosis, localization, and number of lesions. Surgical management has a supportive role in pain relief, the prevention and treatment of pathological fractures, and the decompression of the spinal cord and nerve roots. An adequate preoperative workup is essential for planning surgical treatment, which includes magnetic resonance imaging of the spine. In the case of unstable spinal lesions, minimally invasive and open surgical procedures, as well as their combination, are available for stabilization and decompression. In impending and pathological fractures of the extremities, surgical procedures are superior to conservative therapy for pain relief, restoring stability, walking ability, and limb function. There are multiple options available, including osteosynthesis using bone cement and plates, intramedullary nails, and bone replacement with implants and tumor endoprostheses with good functional results. Permanent reconstruction of the lesions should be the goal of any surgical intervention. The indication for curative, wide resection of the tumor should be considered for solitary plasmocytomas of the bone. Adjuvant radiotherapy leads to significantly improved local tumor control and should be considered after resection and stabilization.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Literatur

  1. Barzilai O, Fisher CG, Bilsky MH (2018) State of the art treatment of spinal metastatic disease. Neurosurgery 82:757–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Baur-Melnyk A, Buhmann S, Becker C et al (2008) Whole-body MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1097–1104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Caers J, Paiva B, Zamagni E et al (2018) Diagnosis, treatment, and response assessment in solitary plasmacytoma: updated recommendations from a European expert panel. J Hematol Oncol 11:10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chak LY, Cox RS, Bostwick DG et al (1987) Solitary plasmacytoma of bone: treatment, progression, and survival. J Clin Oncol 5:1811–1815

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Christoulas D, Terpos E, Dimopoulos MA (2009) Pathogenesis and management of myeloma bone disease. Expert Rev Hematol 2:385–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Delank KS, Wendtner C, Eich HT et al (2011) The treatment of spinal metastases. Dtsch Arztebl Int 108:71–79 (quiz 80)

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Dimopoulos M, Kyle R, Fermand JP et al (2011) Consensus recommendations for standard investigative workup: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 3. Blood 117:4701–4705

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Edelstyn GA, Gillespie PJ, Grebbell FS (1967) The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Experimental observations. Clin Radiol 18:158–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Frankel HL, Hancock DO, Hyslop G et al (1969) The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. Spinal Cord 7:179–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Gerecke C, Fuhrmann S, Strifler S et al (2016) The diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma. Dtsch Arztebl Int 113:470–476

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Guzik G (2017) Oncological and functional results of the surgical treatment of vertebral metastases in patients with multiple myeloma. BMC Surg 17:92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hak DJ, Mauffrey C, Seligson D et al (2014) Use of carbon-fiber-reinforced composite implants in orthopedic surgery. Orthopedics 37:825–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hansen-Algenstaedt N, Kwan MK, Algenstaedt P et al (2017) Comparison between minimally invasive surgery and conventional open surgery for patients with spinal metastasis: a prospective propensity score-matched study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42:789–797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Heindel W, Gubitz R, Vieth V et al (2014) The diagnostic imaging of bone metastases. Dtsch Arztebl Int 111:741–747

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Jurczyszyn A, Czepko R, Banach M et al (2015) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pathological vertebral compression fractures secondary to multiple myeloma—medium-term and long-term assessment of pain relief and quality of life. Adv Clin Exp Med 24:651–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE et al (2003) Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc 78:21–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lasocki A, Gaillard F, Harrison SJ (2017) Multiple myeloma of the spine. Neuroradiol J 30:259–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Orgera G, Krokidis M, Matteoli M et al (2014) Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain management in patients with multiple myeloma: is radiofrequency ablation necessary? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 37:203–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Regelink JC, Minnema MC, Terpos E et al (2013) Comparison of modern and conventional imaging techniques in establishing multiple myeloma-related bone disease: a systematic review. Br J Haematol 162:50–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rollinghoff M, Zarghooni K, Schluter-Brust K et al (2010) Indications and contraindications for vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130:765–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shen J, Du X, Zhao L et al (2018) Comparative analysis of the surgical treatment results for multiple myeloma bone disease of the spine and the long bone/soft tissue. Oncol Lett 15:10017–10025

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Surgeon’s Committee of the Chinese Myeloma Working Group of the International Myeloma F (2016) Consensus on surgical management of myeloma bone disease. Orthop Surg 8:263–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tatar Z, Soubrier M, Dillies AF et al (2014) Assessment of the risk factors for impending fractures following radiotherapy for long bone metastases using CT scan-based virtual simulation: a retrospective study. Radiat Oncol 9:227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Terpos E, Berenson J, Raje N et al (2014) Management of bone disease in multiple myeloma. Expert Rev Hematol 7:113–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Terpos E, Moulopoulos LA, Dimopoulos MA (2011) Advances in imaging and the management of myeloma bone disease. J Clin Oncol 29:1907–1915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Utzschneider S, Schmidt H, Weber P et al (2011) Surgical therapy of skeletal complications in multiple myeloma. Int Orthop 35:1209–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wenger M (2003) Vertebroplasty for metastasis. Med Oncol 20:203–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wiedenhofer B, Akbar M, Lehner B (2012) Tumor management of the spine—no place for soloists. Orthopade 41:593–594

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Zeifang F, Zahlten-Hinguranage A, Goldschmidt H et al (2005) Long-term survival after surgical intervention for bone disease in multiple myeloma. Ann Oncol 16:222–227

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Zarghooni.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

K. Zarghooni, S. Hopf und P. Eysel geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Additional information

Redaktion

M. Hallek, Köln

H. Haller, Hannover

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zarghooni, K., Hopf, S. & Eysel, P. Management ossärer Komplikationen des Multiplen Myeloms. Internist 60, 42–48 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00108-018-0530-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00108-018-0530-2

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation