Reconstruction of pelvic ring, using the metal polymer еndoprosthesis after radical internal resection of pelvis

Keywords: resection of pelvic bones; quality of life; complications.


Objective. Investigation of the treatment results and quality of life in the patients, suffering pelvic bones tumors after radical surgical interventions.

Маterials and methods. Results of treatment of 28 patients after organ-preserving operations and of 26 patients after interventions with the lower extremity excision were analyzed.

Results. Median index of the lower extremity function in accordance to the MTS scale after resection have constituted (61.06 ± 15.83)%. The quality of life indices in accordance to FIM questionnaire in the patients after organ-preserving operations - (110.85 ± 13.49) points and the extremity amputation - (106.73 ± 11.97) points did not differ essentially (р = 0.12 in accordance to Mann-Whitney). The pain syndrome degree in accordance to visual-analogue scale in the patients after organ-preserving operations was estimated at average in (1.82 ± 1.56) points, after the extremity amputation - at average in (1.42 ± 0.58) points, what did not differ essentially (р = 0.6 in accordance to Mann-Whitney). The implants survival in 1 mo have constituted (60.7 ± 9.2)%, in one year - (53.6 ± 9.2)%.

Conclusion. The pelvic ring reconstruction, using metal polymer construction constitutes a secure method. It is possible to improve the quality of life after performance of internal resection of pelvic bones with the extremity preservation, using individualization of the patients selection for performance of such interventions.

Author Biographies

А. G. Diedkov, National Cancer Institute, Kyiv

Diedkov Anatolii
National Cancer Institute, 33/43 Lomonosova Str., 03022, Kyiv, Ukraine
Tel. 067 935 18 88,
ORCID 0000-0002-2187-0502

V. Yu. Коstiuk, National Cancer Institute, Kyiv

Kostiuk Viktor
National Cancer Institute, 33/43 Lomonosova Str., 03022, Kyiv, Ukraine
Tel. 098 529 99 06,
ORCID 0000-0003-2619-159X


Derzhavin VA, KarpenkoVJu, Buharov AV. Tipy rasshirennyh organosohranjajushhih i rekonstruktivnyh hirurgicheskih vmeshatel’stv pri opuholevom porazhenii vertluzhnoj vpadiny. Onkologija. Zhurnal im. P. A. Gercena. 2015;4(5):58-68. doi:10.17116/onkolog20154558-68. [In Russian].

Guder WK, Hardes J, Gosheger G, Henrichs MP, Nottrott M, Streitbürger A. Analysis of surgical and oncological outcome in internal and external hemipelvectomy in 34 patients above the age of 65 years at a mean follow-up of 56 months. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16:33. doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0494-5.

Umer M, Ali M, Rashid RH, Mohib Y, Rashid HU. Outcomes of internal hemipelvectomy for pelvic tumors: a developing country’s prospective. Int J Surg Oncol (NY). 2017;2(4):e07. doi:10.1097/IJ9.0000000000000007.

Enneking WE, Dunham WK. Resection and reconstruction for primary neo-plasms involving the innominate bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978 Sep;60(6):731-46. PMID:701308.

Campanacci D, Chacon S, Mondanelli N, Beltrami G, Scoccianti G, Caff G, et al. Pelvic massive allograft reconstruction after bone tumour resection. Int Orthop. 2012;36(12):2529-36. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1677-4.

Peng Lin, Youyou Shao, Huigen Lu, Zhengliang Zhang, Haiqing Lin, Shengdong Wang, et al. Pelvic reconstruction with different rod-screw systems following Enneking type I/I + IV resection: a clinical study. Oncotarget. 2017;8(24):38978-38989. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.17164.

Wang W,Yeung KWK. Bone grafts and biomaterials substitutes for bone defect repair: A review. Bioact Mater. 2017;2(4):224-247. doi: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.05.007.

Lazarev IA, Kostiuk VIu, Diedkov AH, Skyban MV. Biomekhanichne kompiuterne modeliuvannia povedinky systemy «kistka - fiksator - endoprotez» pry riznykh vydakh vnutrishnoi hemipelvektomii. Travma. 2018;19(6):28-36. doi: 10.22141/1608-1706.6.19.2018.152218. [In Ukrainian].

Bloem JL, Reidsma II. Bone and soft tissue tumors of hip and pelvis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(12):3793-801. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.101.

Takafumi Ueda, Shigeki Kakunaga, Satoshi Takenaka, Nobuhito Araki, Hideki Yoshikawa. Constrained Total Hip Megaprosthesis for Primary Periacetabular Tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(3):741-9. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2625-8.

Donati D, Di Bella C, Frisoni T, Cevolani L, DeGroot H. Alloprosthetic Composite is a Suitable Reconstruction After Periacetabular Tumor Resection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(5):1450-8. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1799-9.

Guzik G. The Use of LUMIC Prosthesis for the Treatment of Periacetabular Metastases. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2015;17(6):593-602. doi: 10.5604/15093492.1193013.

Beck LA, Einertson MJ, Winemiller MH. Functional outcomes and quality of life after tumor-related hemipelvectomy. Phys Ther. 2008;88(8):916-27. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20070184.

How to Cite
DiedkovА. G., & КоstiukV. Y. (2019). Reconstruction of pelvic ring, using the metal polymer еndoprosthesis after radical internal resection of pelvis. Klinicheskaia Khirurgiia, 86(5), 54-58.
General Problems of Surgery