• Qing-Hua Tian, Cheng-Jian He, Chun-Gen Wu, Yong-Dong Li, Yi-Feng Gu, Tao Wang, Quan-Ping Xiao, and Ming-Hua Li.
• Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, No. 600 Yishan Road, Shanghai, 200233, China. ddqinghua-tian@163.com.
• Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016 Jan 1; 39 (1): 81-9.

PurposeTo compare the efficacy of percutaneous cementoplasty (PCP) with and without interventional internal fixation (IIF) on malignant impending pathological fracture of proximal femur.MethodsA total of 40 patients with malignant impending pathological fracture of proximal femur were selected for PCP and IIF (n = 19, group A) or PCP alone (n = 21, group B) in this non-randomized prospective study. Bone puncture needles were inserted into the proximal femur, followed by sequential installation of the modified trocar inner needles through the puncture needle sheath. Then, 15-45 ml cement was injected into the femur lesion.ResultsThe overall excellent and good pain relief rate during follow-ups were significantly higher in group A than that in group B (89 vs. 57 %, P = 0.034). The average change of VAS, ODI, KPS, and EFES in group A were significantly higher than those in group B at 1-, 3-, 6-month, 1-year (P < 0.05). Meanwhile, The stability of the treated femur was significantly higher in group A than that in group B (P < 0.05).ConclusionPCP and IIF were not only a safe and effective procedure, but resulted in greater pain relief, bone consolidation, and also reduced the risk of fracture than the currently recommended approach of PCP done on malignant proximal femoral tumor.

21 keywords...

hide…