Search

Background: Intralesional excision with curettage is the standard method of giant cell tumor (GCT) treatment, but the ideal filling material after curettage remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the oncological and functional outcomes which underwent cementation or bone grafting after GCT curettage around the knee. Methods: We reported 136 cases with GCTs in distal femur or proximal tibia who accepted curettage from five clinical centers during the last 15 years. All patients were divided into two groups according to filling materials. Recurrence-free survival proportions were used to evaluate oncological outcomes while the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 functional score was used to evaluate functional outcomes. Other parameters including surgical complication, general condition, and radiological classification had been analyzed. The valid statisitical data was analyzed using SPSS 13.0 software. Results: After GCT curettage, 86 patients (63.2%) accepted bone grafting while 50 patients (36.8%) accepted cementation. There was no statistical difference in age, gender, tumor location, radiological classification, fixation, follow-up time, and MSTS 93 functional score between cementation group and bone grafting group. The recurrence-free survival proportions showed that the recurrence rate in bone grafting group was higher than it in cementation group (P = 0.034). Surgical complication was lower in cementation group than that in bone grafting group but without statistically significant difference (P = 0.141). Conclusions: Parameters including patients' age, gender, tumor location, and radiological classification did not affect surgeons' treatments in cavity filling after GCT curettage. Cementation should be recommended because of easy usage, the similar postoperative knee function with bone grafting, and the better local tumor control than bone grafting.

Background: The purpose of this study was to discuss the clinical results which related to the location of giant cell tumors (GCTs) in the pelvis so as to determine the ideal surgical treatment protocol., Methods: We report 29 cases who accepted surgical treatment from five clinical centers during the last 12 years. All patients were divided into three groups according to tumor locations, and they were also classified into two groups in light of surgical treatments. The parameters for outcome evaluation consisting of general condition, surgical complications, local disease control, and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 functional score had been analyzed, respectively., Results: Surgical treatment in the acetabular area usually resulted in postoperative complications and poor function. One patient who accepted intralesional surgery and two who accepted wide resection had local recurrence. The mean functional score was 25.4 for the 8 patients who received intralesional surgery and 21.9 for the 21 patients who received wide resection. Surgical complications occurred in 1 patient who underwent intralesional surgery and the other 6 patients who underwent wide resection., Conclusions: We conclude that surgical treatment of pelvic GCTs in the acetabular area is difficult to select as it is always accompanied by complications and poor function. Compared to wide resection, intralesional surgery combined with a meticulous preoperative planning may lower the recurrence rate and obtain favorable postoperative functional results.