Cargando…

Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection

AIM: As a locally destructive intermediate bone tumor with low incidence, high recurrence rate, and difficulty in reconstruction, giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the proximal femur has no unified surgical treatment standard. This study aimed to compare the differences in local recurrence, reconst...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yuan, Yuhao, Liu, Qing, Liu, Yupeng, Wu, Ziyi, Zhong, Wei, He, Hongbo, Luo, Wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8720996/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988016
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.771863
_version_ 1784625242992279552
author Yuan, Yuhao
Liu, Qing
Liu, Yupeng
Wu, Ziyi
Zhong, Wei
He, Hongbo
Luo, Wei
author_facet Yuan, Yuhao
Liu, Qing
Liu, Yupeng
Wu, Ziyi
Zhong, Wei
He, Hongbo
Luo, Wei
author_sort Yuan, Yuhao
collection PubMed
description AIM: As a locally destructive intermediate bone tumor with low incidence, high recurrence rate, and difficulty in reconstruction, giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the proximal femur has no unified surgical treatment standard. This study aimed to compare the differences in local recurrence, reconstruction durability, and postoperative function after treatment with either extended curettage (EC) or segmental resection (SR) for GCTB in the proximal femur so as to provide constructive suggestions for the rational selection of EC or SR operation scheme. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 29 patients (15 men and 14 women) were included in this retrospective study, with a mean age of 32.1 years. According to the division method of proximal femur of International Society Of Limb Salvage (ISOLS), there was 1 case in the H1 area, 17 cases in the H2 area, 10 cases in the H1+H2 area, and 1 case in the H1+H2+H3 area. Among them were 11 cases of Campanacci grade II GCTB, 18 cases of Campanacci grade III GCTB, and 7 cases with pathological fractures. All patients underwent either EC or SR surgery. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was used for patient evaluation. The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. Regular follow-up was performed to evaluate the recurrence rate, limb function, and long-term complications of the two surgical methods. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for a mean of 60.4 months. Local recurrence occurred in one of 19 patients treated with EC (5.3%) and one of 10 patients treated with SR (10%). The MSTS score of lower limb function in patients in the EC group was better compared to patients in the SR group (P = 0.002). Complications occurred in 2 cases (10.5%) and 5 cases (50%) in the EC group (osteoarthritis, osteonecrosis) and SR group (joint stiffness, infection, prosthesis loosening), respectively, with significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.03). The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. The EC group showed an optimal rate of 94.7% (18/19) as opposed to 80% (8/10) in the SR group. CONCLUSIONS: For GCTB in the proximal femur, when the tumor does not extensively involves the surrounding soft tissues, the articular surface was not damaged, and there is no pathological fracture with apparent displacement, EC surgery should be fully considered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8720996
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87209962022-01-04 Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection Yuan, Yuhao Liu, Qing Liu, Yupeng Wu, Ziyi Zhong, Wei He, Hongbo Luo, Wei Front Oncol Oncology AIM: As a locally destructive intermediate bone tumor with low incidence, high recurrence rate, and difficulty in reconstruction, giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the proximal femur has no unified surgical treatment standard. This study aimed to compare the differences in local recurrence, reconstruction durability, and postoperative function after treatment with either extended curettage (EC) or segmental resection (SR) for GCTB in the proximal femur so as to provide constructive suggestions for the rational selection of EC or SR operation scheme. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 29 patients (15 men and 14 women) were included in this retrospective study, with a mean age of 32.1 years. According to the division method of proximal femur of International Society Of Limb Salvage (ISOLS), there was 1 case in the H1 area, 17 cases in the H2 area, 10 cases in the H1+H2 area, and 1 case in the H1+H2+H3 area. Among them were 11 cases of Campanacci grade II GCTB, 18 cases of Campanacci grade III GCTB, and 7 cases with pathological fractures. All patients underwent either EC or SR surgery. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was used for patient evaluation. The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. Regular follow-up was performed to evaluate the recurrence rate, limb function, and long-term complications of the two surgical methods. RESULTS: All patients were followed up for a mean of 60.4 months. Local recurrence occurred in one of 19 patients treated with EC (5.3%) and one of 10 patients treated with SR (10%). The MSTS score of lower limb function in patients in the EC group was better compared to patients in the SR group (P = 0.002). Complications occurred in 2 cases (10.5%) and 5 cases (50%) in the EC group (osteoarthritis, osteonecrosis) and SR group (joint stiffness, infection, prosthesis loosening), respectively, with significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.03). The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. The EC group showed an optimal rate of 94.7% (18/19) as opposed to 80% (8/10) in the SR group. CONCLUSIONS: For GCTB in the proximal femur, when the tumor does not extensively involves the surrounding soft tissues, the articular surface was not damaged, and there is no pathological fracture with apparent displacement, EC surgery should be fully considered. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-12-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8720996/ /pubmed/34988016 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.771863 Text en Copyright © 2021 Yuan, Liu, Liu, Wu, Zhong, He and Luo https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Yuan, Yuhao
Liu, Qing
Liu, Yupeng
Wu, Ziyi
Zhong, Wei
He, Hongbo
Luo, Wei
Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title_full Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title_fullStr Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title_short Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection
title_sort comparative analysis of two surgical treatment options for giant cell tumor of the proximal femur: extended curettage and segmental resection
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8720996/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34988016
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.771863
work_keys_str_mv AT yuanyuhao comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT liuqing comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT liuyupeng comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT wuziyi comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT zhongwei comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT hehongbo comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection
AT luowei comparativeanalysisoftwosurgicaltreatmentoptionsforgiantcelltumoroftheproximalfemurextendedcurettageandsegmentalresection