Advertisement

Technique of Oncologic Sacrectomy

  • Peter S. Rose
  • Daniel M. Sciubba
Chapter

Abstract

En bloc sacrectomy is a necessary aspect of the curative treatment of many sacral malignancies. This chapter presents the pre-operative considerations, decision-making, and technical execution of oncologic sacrectomy. Many patients can be approached from an all-posterior procedure, although proximal and locally advanced tumors will often require anterior/posterior procedures. Bony reconstruction is generally needed in patients undergoing high or total sacrectomy procedures. Complications remain frequent, and oncologic outcomes vary by surgical margin and tumor histology.

Keywords

Sacrectomy Sacrum Chordoma Sarcoma Vertebrectomy En bloc resection Spinopelvic resection Spinopelvic reconstruction 

References

  1. 1.
    Du Z, Guo W, Yang R, Tang X, Ji T, Li D. What is the value of surgical intervention for sacral metastases? PLoS One. 2016;11:e0168313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fuchs B, Dickey ID, Yaszemski MJ, Inwards CY, Sim FH. Operative management of sacral chordoma. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2211–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hsieh PC, Xu R, Sciubba DM, McGirt MJ, Nelson C, Witham TF, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes following en bloc resections for sacral chordomas and chondrosarcomas: a series of twenty consecutive patients. Spine. 2009;15:2233–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ruggieri P, Angelini A, Ussia G, Montalti M, Mercuri M. Surgical margins and local control in resection of sacral chordomas. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2939–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angelini A, Pala E, Calabro T, Maraldi M, Ruggieri P. Prognostic factors in surgical resection of sacral chordoma. J Surg Oncol. 2015;112:344–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fourney DR, Rhines LD, Hentschel SJ, Skibber JM, Wolinsky JP, Weber KL, et al. En bloc resection of primary sacral tumors: classification of surgical approaches and outcome. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(2):111–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gunterberg B, Kewenter J, Petersen I, Stener B. Anorectal function after major resections of the sacrum with bilateral or unilateral sacrifice of sacral nerves. Br J Surg. 1976;63:546–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gunterberg B, Norlen L, Stener B, Sundin T. Neurologic evaluation after resection of the sacrum. Investig Urol. 1975;13:183–8.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Todd LT Jr, Yaszemski MJ, Currier BL, Fuchs B, Kim CW, Sim FH. Bowel and bladder function after major sacral resection. Clin Orthop Relat Red. 2002;397:36–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moran D, Zadnik PL, Taylor T, Groves ML, Yurter A, Wolinsky JP, et al. Maintenance of bowel, bladder, and motor functions after sacrectomy. Spine J. 2015;15:222–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mankin HJ, Mankin CJ, Simon MA. The hazards of biopsy revisited. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:656–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sebro R, DeLaney TF, Hornicek F, Schwab J, Choy E, Nielsen GP, et al. Frequency and risk factors for additional lesions in the axial spine in subjects with chordoma: indications for screening. Spine. 2017;42:E37–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Glatt BS, Disa JJ, Mehrara BJ, Pusic AL, Boland P, Cordeiro PG. Reconstruction of extensive partial or total sacrectomy defects with a transabdominal vertices rectus abdominus flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2006;56:526–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McLoughlin GS, Sciubba DM, Witham T, Bydon A, Gokaslan ZL, Wolinsky JP. En bloc sacrectomy performed in a single stage through a posterior approach. Neurosurgery. 2008;63:ONS115–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brown MJ, Kor DJ, Curry TB, Warner MA, Rodrigues ES, Rose SH, et al. Sacral tumor resection : the effect of surgical staging on patient outcomes, resource management, and hospital cost. Spine. 2011;26:1570–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Clarke MJ, Dasenbrook H, Bydon A, Sciubba DM, McGirt MJ, Hsieh PC, et al. Posterior-only approach for en bloc sacrectomy. Neurosurgery. 2012;71:357–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    MacCarty CS, Waugh JM, Mayo CW, Coventry MB. The surgical treatment of presacral tumors : a combined problem. Proc Staff Meet Mayo Clin. 1952;27:73–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stener B, Gunteberg B. High amputation of the sacrum for extirpation of tumors : principles and techniques. Spine. 1978;3:351–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hata M, Kawahara N, Tomita K. Influence of ligation of the internal iliac veins on the venous plexuses around the sacrum. J Orthop Sci. 1998;3:264–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sherman CE, Rose PS, Pierce LL, Yaszemski MJ, Sim FH. Prospective assessment of patient morbidity from prone sacral positioning. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16:51–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hugate RR Jr, Dickey ID, Phimolsarnti R, Yaszemski MJ, Sim FH. Mechanical effects of partial sacrectomy: when is reconstruction necessary? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;450:82–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dickey ID, Higate RR Jr, Fuchs B, Yaszemski MJ, Simg FH. Reconstruction after total sacrectomy: early experience with a new technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;438:42–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eck JC, Yaszemski MJ, Sim FH. Sacrectomy and spinopelvic reconstruction. Semin Spine Surg. 2009;21:99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gallia G, Haque R, Garonzik I, Witham TF, Khavkin YA, Wolinsky JP, et al. Spinal-pelvic reconstruction after total sacrectomy for en bloc resection of a giant sacral chordoma: technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3:501–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kelly B, Shen F, Schwab J, Arlet V, Diangelo DJ. Biomechanical testing of a novel four-rod technique for lumbopelvic reconstruction. Spine. 2008;33:E400–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ackerman DB, Rose PS, Moran SL, Dekutoski MB, Bishop AT, Shin AY. The results of vascularized-free fibular grafts in complex spinal reconstruction. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:170–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    McDowell S, Sim F, Rose P, Yaszemski M. Reconstruction of the pelvic ring following surgery for malignancy involving the sacroiliac joint. 19th International Society of Limb Salvage General Meeting. Kanazawa, Japan. 2017.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zileli M, Hoscuskun C, Brastianos P, Sabah D. Surgical treatment of primary sacral tumors: complications associated with sacrectomy. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15:1–8.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Houdek M, Rose P, Schwab P, Yaszemski M, et al. A comparison of outcome of treatment paradigms for sacral chordoma: does pre-operative radiation improve prognosis? Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Annual Meeting. Denver, 2017.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Van Wulfften Palthe OD, Houdek MT, Rose PS, Yaszemski MJ, Sim FH, Boland PJ, et al. How does the level of nerve root resection in en bloc sacrectomy influence patient-reported outcomes? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475:607–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gokaslan ZL, Romsdahl MM, Kroll SS, et al. Total sacrectomy and Galveston L-rod reconstruction for malignant neoplasms. Technical note. J Neurosurg. 1997;87(5):781–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gallia GL, Suk I. Lumbopelvic reconstruction after combined L5 spondylectomy and total sacrectomy for en bloc resection of a malignant fibrous histiocytoma. Neurosurgery. 2010;67:E498–02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mayo ClinicDepartment of Othopaedic SurgeryRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryThe Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations