Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014;22(6):308-11.
doi: 10.1590/1413-78522014220600973.

GCT: What happened after 10 years of curettage and cement? Retrospective study of 46 cases

André Mathias Baptista  1 , André Ferrari de França Camargo  1 , Marcelo Tadeu Caiero  1 , Daniel César Seguel Rebolledo  1 , Luiz Filipe Marques Correia  1 , Olavo Pires de Camargo  1
Affiliations

GCT: What happened after 10 years of curettage and cement? Retrospective study of 46 cases

André Mathias Baptista et al. Acta Ortop Bras. 2014.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the functional outcome of patients with and without arthrosis, and to determine whether the development of arthrosis is related to the distance of the tumor from the subchondral bone.

Methods: Forty six patients treated for Giant-cell tumor (GCT) between 1975 and 1999 met inclusion criteria. GCT was diagnosed by percutaneous biopsy and confirmed after resection, in all cases. Campanacci's and Kellgren's classification, the distance of the cement to the articular surface and MSTS score were obtained throughout the sample.

Results: The distance of the cement to the subchondral bone was associated with greater risk of developing arthrosis, but there was no difference in MSTS scores between patients with or without arthrosis.

Conclusion: We found that the distance from the cement to the subchondral bone has a prognostic value regarding future arthrosis, but it does not impact on the functional outcome. Level of Evidence IV, Therapeutic Study.

Keywords: Bone neoplasms; Curettage; Giant cell tumors; Outcome assessment (health care); Process assessment (health care).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All the authors declare that there is no potential conflict of interest referring to this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Anatomic location.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Campanacci M, Baldini N, Boriani S, Sudanese A. Giant-cell tumor of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69(1):106–114. - PubMed
    1. Enneking WF, Spanier SS, Goodman MA. A system for the surgical staging of musculoskeletal sarcoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;(153):106–120. - PubMed
    1. Turcotte RE, Wunder JS, Isler MH, Bell RS, Schachar N, Masri BA, et al. Canadian Sarcoma Group. Giant cell tumor of long bone: a Canadian Sarcoma Group study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(397):248–258. - PubMed
    1. Ng ES, Saw A, Sengupta S, Nazarina AR, Path M. Giant cell tumour of bone with late presentation: review of treatment and outcome. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2002;10(2):120–128. - PubMed
    1. Tubbs WS, Brown LR, Beabout JW, Rock MG, Unni KK. Benign giant-cell tumor of bone with pulmonary metastases: clinical findings and radiologic appearance of metastases in 13 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;158(2):331–334. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources