Skip to content

Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of the Use of a Patient Specific Instrument for Surgical Resection of Malignant Bone Tumor Within the Pelvis Versus the Conventional Surgical Treatment

Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of the Use of a Patient Specific Instrument for Surgical Resection of Malignant Bone Tumor Within the Pelvis Versus the Conventional Surgical Treatment

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02544711
Acronym
MARGIC
Enrollment
88
Registered
2015-09-09
Start date
2015-12-31
Completion date
2021-05-31
Last updated
2021-07-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Sarcoma, Bone Tumor

Keywords

Pelvis, Surgical resection, Patient specific instrument

Brief summary

Primitive malignant bone tumor or mixt tumor (compounded of soft tissues and bone) is a rare pathology particularly within the pelvis, the sacrum or the hip (between 25 and 80 new cases in France per year). The reference treatment is a surgical en bloc resection associated or not to a medical treatment. This surgery remains highly challenging because of the complex three-dimensional geometry of the pelvic bone and the proximity of important organs and neurovascular structures. The local recurrence rate is significantly increased when the resection does not respect a safe tissues margin (R0 margin). A new technology has been developed and used in different reference sites the Patient Specific Instrument (PSI), manufactured by 3D-Side. The PSI allows for a more secure and reliable surgical gesture, leading to more frequent R0 margins. The main objective of this study is to compare the efficiency of the PSI for bone tumor resections within the pelvis with respect to the reference method.

Interventions

The proposed innovation consists in using patient specific instrument (PSI) for tumor resection. It is compounded of a preoperative assistance to plan the surgery and an intraoperative assistance to reproduce the preoperative planning.

The conventional treatment is planned on two-dimensional images (CT and MRI).

Sponsors

Nantes University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Screening Critieria: Retrospective group (reference) * Patient already operated for the same indication as detailed in the prospective group inclusion criteria * Surgery date within the 6 years before the study activation in the participating center * Adult (18 years old or more) at the time of surgery Inclusion Criteria: Prospective group (innovation) * Primitive malignant pelvic bone tumor or mixt tumor (primary bone sarcoma, soft tissue sarcoma with bone extension, giant cells tumor of bone and any tumor requiring such a resection) * Indication for a wide monobloc resection according to clinical guidelines of the pathology (en bloc resection of iliac bone including a bone section from periacetabular Enneking zone 2 to the sacrum zone 4, hip extra-articular resection for proximal femur tumors and sacral tumor or ilio-sacral tumors that need a vertical osteotomy or horizontal osteotomy above S2) * Ability to fill in Euroqol and TESS questionnaires * Adult (18 years old or more) * Health insurance holder Retrospective group (reference) Patient fulfilling the matching criteria with one patient of the prospective group, according to the following matching criteria (in order of importance): 1. Tumor location (Enneking zones 1, 2, 1-2, 2-3, 1-2-3, 1-2-4, 1-2-3-4, 1-4, sacrum) 2. Tumor type (chondrosarcoma, osteosarcoma, Ewing, chordoma, other tumor type) 3. Surgery center 4. Tumor size (as close as possible between both patients) 5. Response to chemotherapy (good, bad, not applicable).

Exclusion criteria

Prospective group (innovation) * Patient suffering from a local recurrence or a metastasis at recruitment time * Absence of informed consent * Pregnancy or breastfeeding * Minors * Adults under guardianship or trusteeship Retrospective group (reference) * Patient not fulfilling the protocol matching criteria * Refusal to participate

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
ICER between the innovation treatment group and the reference treatment group.3 yearsIncremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) as assessed from the healthcare system perspective: Cost/Local prevented recurrence at 3 years postoperatively

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Rate and nature of adverse events related to surgery for each treatment groupPer-operatively and within 3 years after surgery
Quality Of Life (QOL) of patients treated by PSI (prospective group)0, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 monthsEuroqol questionnaire score
R0, R1 and R2 margin ratesWithin 3 years after surgeryR0, R1 and R2 margin rates as observed by histological exam for each surgical treatment, for each treatment group.
MSTS score12 and 36 monthsMusculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) Score which evaluates 6 items: pain, function, emotional acceptance, walking capacity, technical walking aids, gait.
TESS Score12 and 36 monthsToronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) which evaluates 30 items about the global function and patient's activity level.
Indirect estimations of means of Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) of patients treated by the reference treatment (retrospective group) extrapolated from QOL of patients treated by PSI (prospective group)3 yearsQALYs measures for this group will be extrapolated from the prospective group by estimating the impact of a local recurrence on health-related quality of life.

Countries

France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026