4.3 Article

Burden of complications after giant cell tumor surgery. A single-center retrospective study of 192 cases

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.103047

关键词

Giant cell tumor of bone; Bone tumor; Tumor recurrence; Bone curettage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recurrence is the main cause of surgical revision in giant cell tumor of bone, but other complications, such as mechanical issues or infection, are often underestimated.
Background: Surgical complications are frequent with giant cell tumor of bone; recurrence is the best known and most widely studies; other causes of failure have been less well investigated. We therefore performed a retrospective study to identify and assess the main reasons for surgical revision. Hypothesis: Recurrence is the main cause of surgical revision in giant cell tumor of bone, but other complications, such as mechanical issues or infection, are underestimated. Patients and methods: A single-center retrospective study included 192 patients (included from 2000 to 2016) undergoing first giant cell tumor of bone surgery in a bone tumor reference center. Surgery consisted in curettage for 152 patients (79%) and resection for 40 (21%). The 3 main reconstruction techniques were filling (136 patients; 71%), prosthesis (18 patients; 9%), and fusion (14 patients: 7%). Filling used cement in 9 cases (7%) and bone graft in 127 (93%). Cumulative incidence functions were calculated. Results: There were 171 revision procedures in 92 patients: 43 for mechanical reasons, 30 for infection, 86 for tumor recurrence, 12 for other causes. Cumulative incidence of revision at 10 years was 36% (95% CI: 27-44) for recurrence, 26% (95% CI: 17-36) for mechanical causes, and 13% (95% CI: 9-19) for infection, for overall cumulative incidence of revision of 61% (95% CI: 50-69). Discussion: Risk of all-cause surgical revision in giant cell tumor of bone was 61% at 10 years, with recurrence accounting for only half of cases. Level of evidence: IV.(c) 2021 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

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

4.3
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