| Summary: | Background: Intralesional excision with curettage is the standard method of giant cell tumor (GCT) treatment, but the ideal filling material after curettage remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the oncological and functional outcomes which underwent cementation or bone grafting after GCT curettage around the knee.
Methods: We reported 136 cases with GCTs in distal femur or proximal tibia who accepted curettage from five clinical centers during the last 15 years. All patients were divided into two groups according to filling materials. Recurrence-free survival proportions were used to evaluate oncological outcomes while the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) 93 functional score was used to evaluate functional outcomes. Other parameters including surgical complication, general condition, and radiological classification had been analyzed. The valid statisitical data was analyzed using SPSS 13.0 software.
Results: After GCT curettage, 86 patients (63.2%) accepted bone grafting while 50 patients (36.8%) accepted cementation. There was no statistical difference in age, gender, tumor location, radiological classification, fixation, follow-up time, and MSTS 93 functional score between cementation group and bone grafting group. The recurrence-free survival proportions showed that the recurrence rate in bone grafting group was higher than it in cementation group (P = 0.034). Surgical complication was lower in cementation group than that in bone grafting group but without statistically significant difference (P = 0.141).
Conclusions: Parameters including patients' age, gender, tumor location, and radiological classification did not affect surgeons' treatments in cavity filling after GCT curettage. Cementation should be recommended because of easy usage, the similar postoperative knee function with bone grafting, and the better local tumor control than bone grafting.
|
|---|
