4.6 Article

A comparison of cyst wall curettage and en bloc excision in the treatment of aneurysmal bone cysts

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1477-7819-11-109

关键词

Aneurysmal bone cyst; Children; Curettage; En bloc excision; Recurrences

资金

  1. KBN [5866/B/P01/2010/38]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The recurrence rate after aneurysmal bone cyst (ABC) treatment is quite high despite its benign nature. In ABC therapy, curettage is the treatment of choice; en bloc excision results in a lower recurrence rate, but more extensive reconstructive surgery is needed with associated morbidity. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of the two treatment options. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 26 patients treated for ABCs: 16 by curettage and 10 by en bloc excision. Each lesion was classified according to Enneking and patients were followed up for a mean time of 9.2 years. On follow-up, radiological examination and functional assessment (range of motion, muscle strength) were performed. Recurrence was defined as the presence of an osteolytic lesion, especially one with a tendency to grow. Results: On follow-up, the following symptoms were more prevalent in the en bloc excision group compared to the curettage group: pain (en bloc 20% versus curettage 6.25%), limb length differences (en bloc 20% versus curettage 12.5%), reduced range of motion (en bloc 20% versus curettage 6.25%) and muscle strength impairment (en bloc 50% versus curettage 31.2%); however, the differences were not statistically significant (P >0.05). In the curettage group, two cases of postoperative complications and two cases of recurrence were seen, while in the en bloc excision group one case of complications was noted. Conclusions: Curettage is a standard procedure in ABC management. En bloc excision is another option, albeit more technically demanding, that may be considered in recurrent lesions with extensive bone destruction or for cysts in an expendable location.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据