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

J Bone Joint Surg Am · Oct 07 2026 · Recent

Kashyap J, Carlson LA, Garvin LE, Schoedel KE, Lohse I, Lee SJ, et al.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Orthopaedic Oncology

SUMMARY — THE REDUCTIONIn 105 RCC long-bone metastasis patients, intralesional surgery had more mortality overall but not in solitary metastases, with similar reoperation rates versus resection and reconstruction, so both are reasonable options.
Abstract, as published

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.

Featured in the 2026-10-08 issue.

← Clinical outcomes of the LORDS strategy for thoracolumbar spi…

The Reduction is a free email digest of newly published orthopaedic literature — a handful of new papers in the subspecialties you choose, each summarized like this one. Subscribe free or browse the archive.