Treatment of giant cell tumor of bone using bone grafting and cementation with versus without gel foam

Pub Date : 2022-06-27 DOI:10.1080/20905068.2022.2084868
Ahmed A. Eldesouqi, R. Ragab, Abdel Ghoneim, Bassma Mohamed Sabaa, A. Rafalla
{"title":"Treatment of giant cell tumor of bone using bone grafting and cementation with versus without gel foam","authors":"Ahmed A. Eldesouqi, R. Ragab, Abdel Ghoneim, Bassma Mohamed Sabaa, A. Rafalla","doi":"10.1080/20905068.2022.2084868","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Background Giant cell tumor (GCT) of bone is a benign locally aggressive tumor that constitutes 20% of the body's benign bone tumors. Most of the GCTs exhibit a typical epiphyseal location that shows a tendency for significant bone destruction and local recurrence. We aimed to assess the functional and oncological outcomes of GCT patients treated with bone grafting and cementation with or without gel foam. Materials and methods This prospective study included 40 patients presented at El Hadara University Hospital with GCT of bone around the knee from January 2017 to January 2022 treated by bone graft and cementation. Twenty cases were treated with gel foam (Group I) and 20 cases were treated without gel foam (Group II) through random allocation without selection. Recurrence was assessed as progressive lysis of 5 mm at the bone cement interface. Functional outcomes were assessed using the musculoskeletal tumor society score (MSTS) after a period of minimum 30 months. Results In Group I, 18 patients (90%) had excellent results (range 24 and 30) according to MSTS and two patients (10%) had good results (range 18 and 23), while in Group II, 16 patients (80%) had excellent results and four patients (20%) had good results. No patients were graded as having fair or poor results. Twenty patients (100%) had satisfactory results, and no patients (0%) had unsatisfactory results. The overall recurrence rate was about 15%. Conclusion Reconstruction of GCT of bone with sandwich technique offers good option as joint preserving surgery. Most of the patients get benefit in terms of better quality of life and good function regardless of age and gender. Subchondral bone grafting reduces the effect of heat on articular cartilage, but longer follow-up is required. There is no benefit of gel foam addition in terms of function or oncological outcome.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20905068.2022.2084868","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Giant cell tumor (GCT) of bone is a benign locally aggressive tumor that constitutes 20% of the body's benign bone tumors. Most of the GCTs exhibit a typical epiphyseal location that shows a tendency for significant bone destruction and local recurrence. We aimed to assess the functional and oncological outcomes of GCT patients treated with bone grafting and cementation with or without gel foam. Materials and methods This prospective study included 40 patients presented at El Hadara University Hospital with GCT of bone around the knee from January 2017 to January 2022 treated by bone graft and cementation. Twenty cases were treated with gel foam (Group I) and 20 cases were treated without gel foam (Group II) through random allocation without selection. Recurrence was assessed as progressive lysis of 5 mm at the bone cement interface. Functional outcomes were assessed using the musculoskeletal tumor society score (MSTS) after a period of minimum 30 months. Results In Group I, 18 patients (90%) had excellent results (range 24 and 30) according to MSTS and two patients (10%) had good results (range 18 and 23), while in Group II, 16 patients (80%) had excellent results and four patients (20%) had good results. No patients were graded as having fair or poor results. Twenty patients (100%) had satisfactory results, and no patients (0%) had unsatisfactory results. The overall recurrence rate was about 15%. Conclusion Reconstruction of GCT of bone with sandwich technique offers good option as joint preserving surgery. Most of the patients get benefit in terms of better quality of life and good function regardless of age and gender. Subchondral bone grafting reduces the effect of heat on articular cartilage, but longer follow-up is required. There is no benefit of gel foam addition in terms of function or oncological outcome.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
骨移植加骨水泥治疗骨巨细胞瘤的比较
摘要背景骨巨细胞瘤(GCT)是一种良性的局部侵袭性肿瘤,占人体良性骨肿瘤的20%。大多数GCT表现出典型的骨骺位置,显示出明显的骨破坏和局部复发的趋势。我们的目的是评估接受骨移植和带或不带凝胶泡沫的骨水泥治疗的GCT患者的功能和肿瘤学结果。材料和方法这项前瞻性研究包括2017年1月至2022年1月在El Hadara大学医院接受膝关节周围骨GCT治疗的40名患者,他们接受了骨移植和骨水泥治疗。20例采用凝胶泡沫治疗(I组),20例不采用凝胶泡沫处理(II组)。复发评估为骨水泥界面处5mm的渐进性溶解。在至少30个月后,使用肌肉骨骼肿瘤社会评分(MSTS)评估功能结果。结果在第一组中,根据MSTS,18名患者(90%)具有良好的结果(范围24和30),2名患者(10%)具有良好结果(范围18和23),而在第二组中,16名患者(80%)具有优良结果,4名患者(20%)具有良好结果。没有患者被评定为结果尚可或较差。20名患者(100%)的结果令人满意,没有一名患者(0%)的结果不令人满意。总复发率约为15%。结论三明治技术重建骨巨细胞瘤是一种良好的关节保留手术选择。大多数患者无论年龄和性别,都能从更好的生活质量和良好的功能方面获益。软骨下骨移植可以减少热对关节软骨的影响,但需要更长的随访时间。在功能或肿瘤学结果方面,添加凝胶泡沫没有任何益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1