title: Giant cell tumor of long bone: a Canadian Sarcoma Group study.
abstract: A multicentric retrospective study of giant cell tumor of bone was conducted among Canadian surgeons. The hypothesis was that no differences would be found in health status, function, or recurrence rate irrespective to the nature of filling material or adjuvant used in patients treated with curettage. One hundred eighty-six cases were collected. There were 96 females and 90 males. The mean age of the patients was 36 years (range, 14-72 years), the minimum followup was 24 months, and the median followup was 60 months. Sixty-two percent of the tumors involved the knee region. One hundred fifty-eight were primary tumors and 28 were recurrences. Campanacci grading was as follows: Grade 1, seven patients; Grade 2, 100 patients; Grade 3, 76 patients; and unknown in three patients. Fifty-six patients had a pathologic fracture. Resection was done in 38 patients and 148 patients had curettage. The latter was supplemented with high speed burring in 135 patients, cement in 64 patients, various combinations of autograft or allograft bone in 61 patients, phenol in 37 patients, and liquid nitrogen in 10 patients. Structural allografts were used in 25 patients. The overall recurrence rate was 17%, 18% after curettage, and 16% after resection. Patients with primary tumors treated with curettage had a 10% recurrence rate. For recurrent lesions treated by curettage, the recurrence rate was 35%. The nature of the filling material used or the type of adjuvant method used or any combination of both failed to show any statistical impact on the recurrence risk. The results from the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society rating from 1987 were significantly lower in patients who sustained a displaced fracture. Results from the bodily pain section of the Short Form-36 also were found to be lower when a pathologic fracture was present. Results from the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Rating 1987, the Short Form-36, and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score did not show differences when either cement or bone graft were used after curettage.
authors.affiliation: University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,
authors.forename: Robert E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Turcotte
authors.forename: Jay S
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Wunder
authors.forename: Marc H
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Isler
authors.forename: Robert S
authors.initials: RS
authors.lastname: Bell
authors.forename: Norman
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Schachar
authors.forename: Bassam A
authors.initials: BA
authors.lastname: Masri
authors.forename: Guy
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Moreau
authors.forename: Aileen M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Davis
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001843:Bone Cements; D001859:Bone Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D016025:Bone Transplantation; D003475:Curettage; D005260:Female; D005266:Femoral Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery; D018212:Giant Cell Tumor of Bone / Q000601:surgery*; D006305:Health Status Indicators; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; D011788:Quality of Life; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013977:Tibia; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D001843:Bone Cements