Compassionate use of a custom 3D-printed sacral implant for revision of failing sacrectomy: case report

View More View Less
  • Department of Neurosurgery, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00
Print or Print + Online

Reconstruction of the spinopelvic continuity after sacral resection for primary sacral tumors remains challenging. Complex anatomical and biomechanical factors of this transition zone may be addressed with the advancement of 3D-printed implants. Here, the authors report on a 67-year-old patient with a sacral chordoma who initially underwent total en bloc sacrectomy followed by standard spinopelvic reconstruction. Pseudarthrosis and instrumentation failure of the lumbosacral junction construct subsequently developed. A custom 3D-printed sacral prosthesis was created using high-resolution CT images. Emergency Food and Drug Administration approval was obtained, and the custom device was implanted as a salvage reconstruction surgery. Made of porous titanium mesh, the custom artificial sacrum was placed in the defect based on the anticipated osteotomic planes and was fixed with a screw-rod system along with a fibular bone strut graft. At the 18-month follow-up, the patient was disease free and walking short distances with assistance. CT revealed excellent bony incorporation into the graft.

The use of a custom 3D-printed prosthesis in spinal reconstruction has been rarely reported, and its application in sacral reconstruction and long-term outcome are novel. While the implant was believed to be critical in endowing the region with enough biomechanical stability to promote healing, the procedure was difficult and several key learning points were discovered along the way.

ABBREVIATIONS FDA = Food and Drug Administration.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplemental Data (PDF 1.33 MB)

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Michael Finn: University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO. michael.finn@cuanschutz.edu.

INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online May 22, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2020.3.SPINE191497.

Disclosures Dr. Finn is a consultant for K2M/Stryker.

  • 1

    Walcott BP, Nahed BV, Mohyeldin A, Chordoma: current concepts, management, and future directions. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(2):e69e76.

  • 2

    Zhang H-Y, Thongtrangan I, Balabhadra RSV, Surgical techniques for total sacrectomy and spinopelvic reconstruction. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15(2):E5.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Stener B, Gunterberg B. High amputation of the sacrum for extirpation of tumors. Principles and technique. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1978;3(4):351366.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Hsieh PC, Xu R, Sciubba DM, Long-term clinical outcomes following en bloc resections for sacral chordomas and chondrosarcomas: a series of twenty consecutive patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(20):22332239.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Bederman SS, Shah KN, Hassan JM, Surgical techniques for spinopelvic reconstruction following total sacrectomy: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. 2014;23(2):305319.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Gallia GL, Haque R, Garonzik I, Spinal pelvic reconstruction after total sacrectomy for en bloc resection of a giant sacral chordoma. Technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(6):501506.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Guo W, Tang X, Zang J, Ji T. One-stage total en bloc sacrectomy: a novel technique and report of 9 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(10):E626E631.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Nishizawa K, Mori K, Saruhashi Y, Long-term clinical outcome of sacral chondrosarcoma treated by total en bloc sacrectomy and reconstruction of lumbosacral and pelvic ring using intraoperative extracorporeal irradiated autologous tumor-bearing sacrum: a case report with 10 years follow-up. Spine J. 2014;14(5):e1e8.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Wuisman P, Lieshout O, Sugihara S, van Dijk M. Total sacrectomy and reconstruction: oncologic and functional outcome. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;(381):192203.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Zang J, Guo W, Yang R, Is total en bloc sacrectomy using a posterior-only approach feasible and safe for patients with malignant sacral tumors? J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;22(6):563570.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Ahmed AK, Pennington Z, Molina CA, Multidisciplinary surgical planning for en bloc resection of malignant primary cervical spine tumors involving 3D-printed models and neoadjuvant therapies: report of 2 cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;30(4):424431.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Kim D, Lim J-Y, Shim K-W, Sacral reconstruction with a 3D-printed implant after hemisacrectomy in a patient with sacral osteosarcoma: 1-year follow-up result. Yonsei Med J. 2017;58(2):453457.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Wei R, Guo W, Ji T, One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, custom-made prosthesis after total en bloc sacrectomy: a technical note. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(7):19021909.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Shah FA, Snis A, Matic A, 3D printed Ti6Al4V implant surface promotes bone maturation and retains a higher density of less aged osteocytes at the bone-implant interface. Acta Biomater. 2016;30:357367.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Malik HH, Darwood ARJ, Shaunak S, Three-dimensional printing in surgery: a review of current surgical applications. J Surg Res. 2015;199(2):512522.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Wong KC. 3D-printed patient-specific applications in orthopedics. Orthop Res Rev. 2016;8:5766.

  • 17

    Palmquist A, Snis A, Emanuelsson L, Long-term biocompatibility and osseointegration of electron beam melted, free-form-fabricated solid and porous titanium alloy: experimental studies in sheep. J Biomater Appl. 2013;27(8):10031016.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Vasconcellos LM, Leite DO, Oliveira FN, Evaluation of bone ingrowth into porous titanium implant: histomorphometric analysis in rabbits. Braz Oral Res. 2010;24(4):399405.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Li D, Guo W, Tang X, Surgical classification of different types of en bloc resection for primary malignant sacral tumors. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(12):22752281.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Fuchs B, Dickey ID, Yaszemski MJ, Operative management of sacral chordoma. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(10):22112216.

  • 21

    Osaka S, Kodoh O, Sugita H, Clinical significance of a wide excision policy for sacrococcygeal chordoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2006;132(4):213218.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Clark AJ, Tang JA, Leasure JM, Gait-simulating fatigue loading analysis and sagittal alignment failure of spinal pelvic reconstruction after total sacrectomy: comparison of 3 techniques. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;20(4):364370.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Dickey ID, Hugate RR Jr, Fuchs B, Reconstruction after total sacrectomy: early experience with a new surgical technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;438:4250.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Le VH, Heckmann N, Jain N, Biomechanical evaluation of supplemental percutaneous lumbo-sacro-iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation following total sacrectomy. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015;28(4):E181E185.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Lim S-H, Jo D-J, Kim S-M, Lim Y-J. Reconstructive surgery using dual U-shaped rod instrumentation after posterior en bloc sacral hemiresection for metastatic tumor: case report. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23(5):630634.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Mindea SA, Chinthakunta S, Moldavsky M, Biomechanical comparison of spinopelvic reconstruction techniques in the setting of total sacrectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(26):E1622E1627.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Shen FH, Harper M, Foster WC, A novel “four-rod technique” for lumbo-pelvic reconstruction: theory and technical considerations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(12):13951401.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Yu B-S, Zhuang X-M, Zheng Z-M, Biomechanical advantages of dual over single iliac screws in lumbo-iliac fixation construct. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(7):11211128.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Xu N, Wei F, Liu X, Reconstruction of the upper cervical spine using a personalized 3D-printed vertebral body in an adolescent with Ewing sarcoma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(1):E50E54.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Wong KC, Kumta SM, Geel NV, Demol J. One-step reconstruction with a 3D-printed, biomechanically evaluated custom implant after complex pelvic tumor resection. Comput Aided Surg. 2015;20(1):1423.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 205 205 205
Full Text Views 29 29 29
PDF Downloads 22 22 22
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0