Giant cell tumors of the distal ulna: long-term recurrence rate and functional outcomes of en bloc resection versus curettage in a multicenter study

OBJECTIVE: The wrist is the second most commonly involved location for GCTB, while distal ulna is a relatively rare location and limited evidence exists on which surgical approaches and reconstruction techniques are optimal. We carried out a multicenter retrospective study to evaluate the recurrence rate of distal ulna GCTB and the long-term functional outcomes of different surgery options. METHODS: All 28 patients received surgical treatment for distal ulna GCTB in one of three tertiary bone tumor centers between May 2007 and January 2021 with a minimum two-year follow-up. Surgical options included intralesional curettage or en bloc resection (one of 3 types). Functional outcomes were assessed by the MSTS score, the QuickDASH instrument, MWS, and MHQ according to the latest treatment. RESULTS: Overall recurrence rate was 14.2%. The curettage group (N = 7) had a significantly higher recurrence rate compared to en bloc resection (N = 21) (42.9% vs 4.8%) (mean follow-up: 88.8 mo). Seven patients received the Darrach procedure, 5 received the original Sauvé–Kapandji procedure, and 9 received the modified Sauvé–Kapandji procedure with extensor carpi ulnaris (ECU) tenodesis. Of the 4 patients having a recurrence, 1 received the Darrach EBR, 2 received the modified Sauvé–Kapandji procedure, and 1 received resection for soft tissue recurrence. Only MWS and esthetics in the MHQ scores were different (curettage, Darrach, Sauvé–Kapandji, and Sauvé–Kapandji with ECU tenodesis [MWS: 96.5 ± 1.3 vs 91.5 ± 4.7 vs 90.8 ± 2.8 vs 91.5 ± 3.6; esthetics in MHQ: 98.5 ± 3.1 vs 89.9 ± 4.7 vs 93.8 ± 4.4 vs 92.6 ± 3.8], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: En bloc resection for distal ulna GCTB had a significantly lower recurrence rate compared with curettage and achieved favorable functional outcome scores. Given the higher recurrence rate after curettage, patients should be well informed of the potential benefits and risks of selecting the distal radioulnar joint-preserving procedure. Moreover, reconstructions after tumor resection of the ulna head do not appear to be necessary. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-023-04150-4.