Is Preoperative Bevacizumab Associated with Increased Complications After Urgent Hip Fracture Surgery? A Retrospective Review

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

1 Department of Surgery, Orthopaedic Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

2 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate whether patients with impending or completed fracture of the proximal femur 
who were treated with bevacizumab in the six weeks prior to surgery are at higher risk of surgical 
complications than patients given bevacizumab outside of the six-week period.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed cases of hip fracture treated between 1995 and 2020 at our institution. 
Patients were included if they were age 18 years or older, underwent hip surgery for impending or completed 
fracture, and received bevacizumab preoperatively but not postoperatively. Charts were reviewed for demographic, 
surgical, and postoperative details. A Cox model was applied to assess whether the timing of preoperative 
bevacizumab administration (≤6 weeks vs. >6 weeks) was associated with the risk of a postoperative complication.
Results: Two of the 23 patients who received bevacizumab ≤6 weeks before surgery experienced complications 
(deep vein thrombosis [n=1] and intraoperative fracture related to progression of disease [n=1]). Of the 53 patients 
who received bevacizumab more than six weeks preoperatively, five experienced complications (wound drainage 
[n=2] and deep vein thrombosis [n=3]). In the Cox model, timing of bevacizumab was not associated with 
postoperative complications (univariable hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.18–4.73).
Conclusion: In this cohort of patients who underwent surgery for hip fractures, we did not observe an increased 
risk of postoperative complications among those who received bevacizumab within six weeks of surgery relative to 
those who received bevacizumab more than six weeks before surgery. The retrospective nature of the study and 
small sample size are limiting factors in this study.
 Level of evidence: III

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Habermann ET, Sachs R, Stern RE, Hirsh DM, Anderson WJ. The 
pathology and treatment of metastatic disease of the femur. 
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982 ;( 169):70-82.
2. Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring 
system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin 
Orthop Relat Res. 1989 ;( 249):256-264. 
3. Bickels J, Dadia S, Lidar Z. Surgical management of metastatic 
bone disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(6):1503-1516. 
doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00175.
4. Brauer CA, Coca-Perraillon M, Cutler DM, Rosen AB. Incidence 
and mortality of hip fractures in the United States. JAMA. 
2009; 302(14):1573-1579. doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1462.
5. Johnell O, Kanis JA. An estimate of the worldwide prevalence, 
mortality and disability associated with hip fracture. 
Osteoporos Int. 2004; 15(11):897-902. doi:10.1007/s00198-
004-1627-0.
6. Tay E. Hip fractures in the elderly: operative versus 
nonoperative management. Singapore Med J. 2016; 
57(4):178-181. doi:10.11622/smedj.2016071.
7. Khattak MJ, Ashraf U, Nawaz Z, Noordin S, Umer M. Surgical 
management of metastatic lesions of proximal femur and the 
hip. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2018; 36:90-95. 
doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2018.09.042.
8. Boateng B, Bartelstein M. Timing of systemic cancer therapy 
relative to surgery to optimize wound healing: Do guidelines 
exist? Presented at: Annual Biomedical Research Conference 
for Minority Students. 2021; virtual meeting. 
9. Mellor JD, Cassumbhoy M, Jefford M. Clinical guidance on the 
perioperative use of targeted agents in solid tumor oncology. 
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2011; 7(2):106-113. 
doi:10.1111/j.1743-7563.2011.01394.x.
10. Yang Y, Lu Y, Tan H, et al. The optimal time of starting 
adjuvant chemotherapy after curative surgery in patients 
with colorectal cancer. BMC Cancer. 2023; 23(1):422. 
doi:10.1186/s12885-023-10863-w.
11. Imran H, Enders F, Krailo M, et al. Effect of time to resumption 
of chemotherapy after definitive surgery on prognosis for 
non-metastatic osteosarcoma. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 
91(3):604-612. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00449.
12. Deptuła M, Zieliński J, Wardowska A, Pikuła M. Wound 
healing complications in oncological patients: perspectives 
for cellular therapy. Postepy Dermatol Alergol. 2019; 
36(2):139-146. doi:10.5114/ada.2018.72585.
13. Keating GM. Bevacizumab: a review of its use in advanced 
cancer. Drugs. 2014; 74(16):1891-1925. 
doi:10.1007/s40265-014-0302-9.
14. Sharma K, Marcus JR. Bevacizumab and wound-healing 
complications: mechanisms of action, clinical evidence, and 
management recommendations for the plastic surgeon. Ann 
Plast Surg. 2013; 71(4):434-440. 
doi:10.1097/SAP.0b013e31824e5e57.
15. Scappaticci FA, Fehrenbacher L, Cartwright T, et al. Surgical 
wound healing complications in metastatic colorectal cancer 
patients treated with bevacizumab. J Surg Oncol. 2005; 
91(3):173-180. doi:10.1002/jso.20301.
16. Erinjeri JP, Fong AJ, Kemeny NE, Brown KT, Getrajdman GI, 
Solomon SB. Timing of administration of bevacizumab 
chemotherapy affects wound healing after chest wall port 
placement. Cancer. 2011; 117(6):1296-1301. 
doi:10.1002/cncr.25573.
17. Gordon MS, Margolin K, Talpaz M, et al. Phase I safety and 
pharmacokinetic study of recombinant human anti-vascular 
endothelial growth factor in patients with advanced cancer. J 
Clin Oncol. 2001; 19(3):843-850. 
doi:10.1200/JCO.2001.19.3.843.
18. Gordon CR, Rojavin Y, Patel M, et al. A review on bevacizumab 
and surgical wound healing: an important warning to all 
surgeons. Ann Plast Surg. 2009; 62(6):707-709. 
doi:10.1097/SAP.0b013e3181828141.
19. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, et al. Bevacizumab 
plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic 
colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350(23):2335-42. 
doi:10.1056/NEJMoa032691.
20. Ellis LM, Curley SA, Grothey A. Surgical resection after 
downsizing of colorectal liver metastasis in the era of 
bevacizumab. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(22):4853-4855. 
doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.23.754.
21. Utsumi H, Honma Y, Nagashima K, et al. Bevacizumab and 
postoperative wound complications in patients with liver 
metastases of colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2015; 
35(4):2255-2261. 
22. Zhang H, Huang Z, Zou X, Liu T. Bevacizumab and woundhealing complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis 
of randomized controlled trials. Oncotarget. 2016; 
7(50):82473-82481. doi:10.18632/oncotarget.12666.
23. Mahfud M, Breitenstein S, El-Badry AM, et al. Impact of preoperative bevacizumab on complications after resection 
of colorectal liver metastases: case-matched control study. 
World J Surg. 2010; 34(1):92-100. doi:10.1007/s00268-009-
0251-8.
24. Clark AJ, Butowski NA, Chang SM, et al. Impact of 
bevacizumab chemotherapy on craniotomy wound healing. J 
Neurosurg. 2011; 114(6):1609-1616. 
doi:10.3171/2010.10.JNS101042.
25. Drake DB, Oishi SN. Wound healing considerations in 
chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Clin Plast Surg. 1995; 
22(1):31-37. 
26. Giakoustidis A, Morrison D, Neofytou K, Giakoustidis D, 
Mudan S. Emergency open incarcerated hernia repair with a 
biological mesh in a patient with colorectal liver metastasis 
receiving chemotherapy and bevacizumab uncomplicated 
wound healing. Case Rep Emerg Med. 2014:2014:848030. 
doi:10.1155/2014/848030.
27. Hyldig N, Birke-Sorensen H, Kruse M, et al. Meta-analysis of 
negative-pressure wound therapy for closed surgical 
incisions. Br J Surg. 2016; 103(5):477-486. 
doi:10.1002/bjs.10084.
28. Meynard P, Seguineau A, Laumonerie P, et al. Surgical 
management of proximal femoral metastasis: fixation or hip 
replacement? A 309 case series. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 
2020; 106(6):1013-1023. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2020.05.007.
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 12, Issue 9
September 2024
Pages 645-651

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 September 2023
  • Revise Date: 06 June 2024
  • Accept Date: 15 May 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics