Survival and Reoperation After Intralesional Procedures Versus Resection and Reconstruction for Renal Cell Carcinoma Bone Metastases

Background: The management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) long-bone metastases often involves surgery with either resection and reconstruction (R&R) or intralesional (IL) procedures. Some literature suggests that R&R improves survival and reduces the risk of recurrence and reoperation, while IL procedures offer lower surgical morbidity and faster recovery. We compared survival and reoperation outcomes following IL versus R&R procedures for RCC long-bone metastases treated at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with histologically confirmed RCC long-bone metastases treated surgically between July 1, 2005, and June 1, 2022. Medical charts were reviewed to collect data on demographics, treatment history, and outcomes. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression and Fine-Gray competing-risks regression were used to evaluate survival and reoperation following IL and R&R procedures. Results: One hundred and five patients (68% male; mean age, 62.6 years; 96% White) with 133 metastases were included. IL surgery was not significantly associated with a greater cumulative incidence of reoperation (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] = 1.08, p = 0.87). Reoperations were primarily due to recurrent disease (29%) and pathologic fracture (33%) in the IL group, compared with recurrent disease (29%), pathologic fracture (14%), and wound infection (14%) in the R&R group. IL surgery was associated with a greater hazard of mortality in the overall cohort (HR = 2.03, p = 0.02), although no significant association was observed in the solitary metastasis subgroup (HR = 1.54, p = 0.49). Conclusions: IL procedures were associated with greater mortality, although this association was not observed among patients with a solitary metastasis. Given no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of reoperation between surgical approaches, IL and R&R procedures are both reasonable treatment options in appropriately selected patients and clinical settings. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Published
2026-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.25.01377
Primary Topic
Management of metastatic bone disease
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Survival and Reoperation After Intralesional Procedures Versus Resection and Reconstruction for Renal Cell Carcinoma Bone Metastases

Richard L. McGough, Ines Lohse, Karen Elizabeth Schoedel, Kurt Richard Weiss et al.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Management of metastatic bone disease
article

Survival and Reoperation After Intralesional Procedures Versus Resection and Reconstruction for Renal Cell Carcinoma Bone Metastases

Richard L. McGough, Ines Lohse, Karen Elizabeth Schoedel, Kurt Richard Weiss, Luke Carlson, Jayanth Kashyap, Stella J. Lee, Lawrence E. Garvin
article en

Abstract

Background: The management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) long-bone metastases often involves surgery with either resection and reconstruction (R&R) or intralesional (IL) procedures. Some literature suggests that R&R improves survival and reduces the risk of recurrence and reoperation, while IL procedures offer lower surgical morbidity and faster recovery. We compared survival and reoperation outcomes following IL versus R&R procedures for RCC long-bone metastases treated at our institution. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with histologically confirmed RCC long-bone metastases treated surgically between July 1, 2005, and June 1, 2022. Medical charts were reviewed to collect data on demographics, treatment history, and outcomes. Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression and Fine-Gray competing-risks regression were used to evaluate survival and reoperation following IL and R&R procedures. Results: One hundred and five patients (68% male; mean age, 62.6 years; 96% White) with 133 metastases were included. IL surgery was not significantly associated with a greater cumulative incidence of reoperation (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] = 1.08, p = 0.87). Reoperations were primarily due to recurrent disease (29%) and pathologic fracture (33%) in the IL group, compared with recurrent disease (29%), pathologic fracture (14%), and wound infection (14%) in the R&R group. IL surgery was associated with a greater hazard of mortality in the overall cohort (HR = 2.03, p = 0.02), although no significant association was observed in the solitary metastasis subgroup (HR = 1.54, p = 0.49). Conclusions: IL procedures were associated with greater mortality, although this association was not observed among patients with a solitary metastasis. Given no significant difference in the cumulative incidence of reoperation between surgical approaches, IL and R&R procedures are both reasonable treatment options in appropriately selected patients and clinical settings. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center (US), University of Pittsburgh (US), University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Management of metastatic bone disease
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.