Late Results after Cement Bone Filling in Treatment of Giant Cell Tumour (GCT) - Retrospective Study

R. Prejbeanu, D. Crisan, A. Bălănescu, H. Haragus, B. Deleanu
{"title":"Late Results after Cement Bone Filling in Treatment of Giant Cell Tumour (GCT) - Retrospective Study","authors":"R. Prejbeanu, D. Crisan, A. Bălănescu, H. Haragus, B. Deleanu","doi":"10.2478/ROJOST-2018-0040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction. Segmental or intralesional excision with curettage or complete resection can be one method of treatment for giant cell tumor (GCT), but the ideal filling material after curettage or resection remains controversial. The purpose of this retrospective study was to follow the latest results and complications regarding the recurrence or degradation of functional status that underwent cementation. Material and methods. We reported 24 cases with GCTs during the last 15 years. All the patients were treated by intralesional excision or segmental resection followed by acrylic cement filling with or no metal augmentation recurrence-free survival proportions were used to evaluate oncological outcomes. Other parameters including surgical complication, general condition, and radiological classification were analyzed. Results. We followed up 20 cases for at least five years postoperatory (from the 5th to the 9th year). The recurrence-free survival proportions showed that the recurrence rate in this group was for 4 patients (2 of them were at second surgery). 2 patients had degradation of implant cement fixation. Parameters including patients’ age, gender, tumor location, and radiological classification did not affect the surgeons’ treatments in cavity filling after GCT curettage. Conclusions. Cementation should be recommended because of easy usage, have long lasting better results, and the better local tumor control than other methods (ex: bone grafting). The risk of recurrence is low and is not related to the cementation and metal augmentation. The cost-benefit is also in favor of this technique.","PeriodicalId":122325,"journal":{"name":"Romanian Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","volume":"194 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ROJOST-2018-0040","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 Introduction. Segmental or intralesional excision with curettage or complete resection can be one method of treatment for giant cell tumor (GCT), but the ideal filling material after curettage or resection remains controversial. The purpose of this retrospective study was to follow the latest results and complications regarding the recurrence or degradation of functional status that underwent cementation. Material and methods. We reported 24 cases with GCTs during the last 15 years. All the patients were treated by intralesional excision or segmental resection followed by acrylic cement filling with or no metal augmentation recurrence-free survival proportions were used to evaluate oncological outcomes. Other parameters including surgical complication, general condition, and radiological classification were analyzed. Results. We followed up 20 cases for at least five years postoperatory (from the 5th to the 9th year). The recurrence-free survival proportions showed that the recurrence rate in this group was for 4 patients (2 of them were at second surgery). 2 patients had degradation of implant cement fixation. Parameters including patients’ age, gender, tumor location, and radiological classification did not affect the surgeons’ treatments in cavity filling after GCT curettage. Conclusions. Cementation should be recommended because of easy usage, have long lasting better results, and the better local tumor control than other methods (ex: bone grafting). The risk of recurrence is low and is not related to the cementation and metal augmentation. The cost-benefit is also in favor of this technique.
骨水泥填充治疗巨细胞瘤(GCT)的晚期疗效回顾性研究
摘要介绍。巨细胞瘤(GCT)的一种治疗方法是局部切除或病灶内切除并刮除或完全切除,但刮除或切除后理想的填充材料仍存在争议。本回顾性研究的目的是跟踪最新的结果和并发症有关复发或退化的功能状态,接受骨水泥。材料和方法。我们在过去15年中报告了24例gct病例。所有患者均行病灶内切除或节段性切除,然后进行丙烯酸骨水泥填充或不进行金属增强,无复发生存率用于评估肿瘤预后。其他参数包括手术并发症、一般情况和放射学分类。结果。我们对20例患者进行了术后5 ~ 9年至少5年的随访。无复发生存率显示本组复发率为4例(其中2例为二次手术)。2例发生假体骨水泥固定降解。患者的年龄、性别、肿瘤位置、影像学分型等参数对GCT刮除后补腔治疗没有影响。结论。与其他方法(如植骨)相比,骨水泥使用方便,效果持久,局部肿瘤控制好,因此应推荐使用骨水泥。复发的风险很低,与骨水泥和金属隆胸无关。成本效益也有利于这种技术。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信