Journal of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (JBST) Editorial Office
For any queries please contact the editorial office
Journal of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (JBST)
Ediotrial office, IORG House, A-203, Manthan Apts, Shreesh CHS, Hajuri Road, Thane [W]
Maharashtra, India. Pin 400604
Tel- 02225834545 (office time 10-5 pm, Mon-Fri)
Email: editor.jbst@gmail.com
Publisher: Indian Orthopaedic Research Group. Thane, India. 400604
Email: indian.ortho@gmail.com | Tel: 022-25834545
Important Information
Journal of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (JBST) License
![]()
Journal of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (JBST) by http://jbstjournal.com/ is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Based on a work at http://jbstjournal.com/.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at editor.jbst@gmail.com
Journal of Bone and Soft Tissue Tumors (JBST) is the official Journal of The Indian Musculo Skeletal Oncology Society


Facilitating Timely Access to Highly Specialized Surgery for Children with Extremity Bone and Soft-Tissue Sarcomas in North and Central India
Original Article | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | JBST January-April 2020 | Page 2-4 | DOI: 10.13107/jbst.2020.v06i01.005
Author: Rashmi Kumari [1], Akshay Tiwari [2], Ishita Maji [1], Haresh Gupta [1], Poonam Bagai [1], Mohini
Daljeet Singh [3], Ramandeep Singh Arora [1]
1. Quality Care, Research and Impact Division, Cankids…Kidscan, New Delhi, India,
2. Max Institute of Cancer Care, , Max Super Speciality Hospital, Saket, Delhi, India,
3. Founder CEO, Max India Foundation, Delhi, India.
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Ramandeep Singh Arora,
Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Max Institute of Cancer Care, Max Super
Speciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi – 110 017, India.
E-mail: childhoodcancer@gmail.com
Abstract
Background: Optimal management of bone and soft-tissue sarcomas (BSTSs) of the extremity in low- and middle-income countries like India remains a challenge due to the paucity of surgical expertise and other resource limitations. In this study, we aimed to develop a multiple stakeholder model where children with extremity BSTS in North and Central India can access specialized surgery without experiencing cost and delays.
Materials and Methods: The model brought together four stakeholders and developed a pathway of identifying eligible patients, facilitating timely referral, providing specialized surgery, and sharing the cost. Services were offered for 1 year (2018–2019) under this model.
Results: Sixteen non-metastatic patients (69% osteosarcoma, 18% soft-tissue sarcoma, and 13% Ewing sarcoma) from five hospitals received specialized extremity BSTS surgery under this model. About 69% had limb salvage surgeries, 19% rotationplasty, and 12% amputation. Surgery was done at a median interval of 16.9 weeks (range 7.3–33.6 weeks) from the date of diagnosis. None of the patients abandoned treatment. The total cost for the facilitation of the surgery, supportive care and social support for the entire cohort was INR 38.7 lakh (USD 54,180) with
an average of INR 2.8 lakh per patient (USD 3920). The patient had to bear no cost toward the surgery.
Conclusions: In this study, we developed a model systematically bringing together four stakeholders and identifying eligible patients, facilitating timely referral, providing specialized surgery at zero cost to the patient, and ensuring completion of treatment and follow-up. Our next goal is to increase the capacity of this model by amplifying its scope and replicating it in other parts of India.
Keywords: Child, Health services accessibility, India, Sarcoma.
References
1. AroraRS. Epidemiology of cancers in children. In: GuptaP, MenonPS, RamjiA, LodhaR, editors. PG Textbook of Pediatric. 2015. p. 2416-20.
2. AroraRS, AlstonRD, EdenTO, GeraciM, BirchJM. The contrasting ageincidence patterns of bone tumours in teenagers and young adults: Implications for aetiology.Int J Cancer2012;131:1678-85.
3. McDowellHP. Update on childhood rhabdomyosarcoma.Arch Dis Child2003;88:354-7.
4. SmithMA, SeibelNL, AltekruseSF, RiesLA, MelbertDL, O’LearyM, et al. Outcomes for children and adolescents with cancer: Challenges for the twenty-first century.J Clin Oncol2010;28:2625-34.
5. SiddiquiYS, SherwaniMK, KhanAQ, ZahidM, AbbasM, AsifN. Neglected orthopedic oncology-causes, epidemiology and challenges for management in developing countries.Indian J Cancer2015;52:325-9.
6. HasanO, ZubairiA, NawazZ, UmerM. Establishing musculoskeletal oncology service in resource constrained country: Challenges and solutions.Int J Surg Oncol (N Y)2017;2:e50.
7. GoodladJR, FletcherCD, SmithMA. Surgical resection of primary softtissue sarcoma. Incidence of residual tumour in 95 patients needing reexcision after local resection.J Bone Joint Surg Br1996;78:658-61.
8. FriedrichP, OrtizR, StraitK, FuentesS, GamboaY, ArambúI, et al. Pediatric sarcoma in Central America: Outcomes, challenges, and plans for improvement.Cancer2013;119:871-9.
9. FriedrichP, OrtizR, FuentesS, GamboaY, AhChu-Sanchez MS, ArambúIC, et al. Barriers to effective treatment of pediatric solid tumors in middle-income countries: Can we make sense of the spectrum of nonbiologic factors that influence outcomes?Cancer2014;120:112-25.
10. PapyanR, TamamyanG, DanielyanS, TananyanA, MuradyanA, SaabR. Identifying barriers to treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma in resource-limited settings: A literature review.Pediatr Blood Cancer 2019;66:e27708. 11. HowardSC, PedrosaM, LinsM, PedrosaA, PuiCH, RibeiroRC, et al. Establishment of a pediatric oncology program and outcomes of childhood a c u t e l y m p h o b l a s t i c l e u k e m i a i n a r e s o u r c e – p o o r area.JAMA2004;291:2471-5.
12. MostertS, SitaresmiMN, GundyCM, JanesV, Sutaryo, VeermanAJ. Comparing childhood leukaemia treatment before and after the introduction of a parental education programme in Indonesia.Arch Dis Child2010;95:20-5.
13. IsraelsT, PaintsilV, NyirendaD, KouyaF, MbahAfungchwi G, HesselingP, et al. Improved outcome at end of treatment in the c o l l a b o r a t i v e w i l m s t u m o u r A f r i c a p r o j e c t . P e d i a t r B l o o d Cancer2018;65:e26945.
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]
Like this:
An Interesting Reconstruction Option after Resection for a Distal Fibular Osteosarcoma: A Case Report
Case Report | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | JBST Jan-April 2020 | Page 13-16 | DOI: 10.13107/jbst.2020.v06i01.008
Author: Manish Pruthi [1], Jagandeep Singh Virk [2], Lokesh Garg [1], Sumit Goyal [4], Anila Sharma [3]
1. Department of Orthopaedic Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi,Delhi, India,
2. Department of Orthopaedic Oncology, Paras Hospitals, Panchkula,Haryana, India,
3. Department of Pathology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, Delhi, India,
4. Department of Medical Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi,India
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Jagandeep Singh Virk,
Department of Orthopaedic Oncology, Paras Hospitals, Panchkula,Haryana, India.
E-mail: jaganvirk_09@yahoo.co.in
Abstract
Fibula is an expandable bone in the body, but tumors arising from the distal part which require a wide resection of the distal fibular part require some form of reconstruction for preventing lateral ankle instability. Many methods involving either bony or soft tissue reconstruction techniques have been described in literature, but consensus regarding which one is optimal for a good oncological and functional outcome is lacking. In this case report, we make use of a biological soft tissue technique involving use of peroneus brevis autograft reconstruction for providing lateral ankle support for a patient suffering from distal fibular osteosarcoma who underwent resection of the distal fibula. The patient went on to have an excellent functional outcome. This technique, although reported in literature, is in the form of only a few cases with a limited follow-up with none reported from the Indian subcontinent.
Keywords: Fibula, Sarcomas, Limb salvage, Reconstruction.
References
1. UnniKK. Dahlin’s Bone Tumors: General Aspects and Data on 11087 Case. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p. 1-9.
2. PerisanoC, MarzettiE, SpinelliMS, GraciC, FabbricianiC, MaffulliN, et al.Clinical management and surgical treatment of distal fibular tumours: A case series and review of the literature.Int Orthop2012;36:1907-13.
3. SchneiderbauerMM, GullerudR, HarmsenWS, ScullySP. Fibular osteosarcomas: Contaminated margins may not impact survival.Clin OrthopRelat Res2007;456:182-7.
4. LaitinenM, HardesJ, AhrensH, GebertC, LeidingerB, LangerM, et al. Treatment of primary malignant bone tumours of the distal tibia.Int Orthop2005;29:255-9.
5. DieckmannR, AhrensH, StreitbürgerA, BudnyTB, HenrichsMP, ViethV, et al.Reconstruction after wide resection of the entire distal fibula in malignant bone tumours.Int Orthop2011;35:87-92.
6. MonsonDK, VojdaniS, DeanTJ, Louis-UgboJ. Lateral ankle stabilization after distal fibular resection using a novel approach: A surgical technique.Clin OrthopRelat Res2014;472:1262-70.
7. EnnekingWF, DunhamW, GebhardtMC, MalawarM, PritchardDJ. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system.Clin OrthopRelat Res1993;286:241-6.
8. MohlerDG, CunninghamDC.Adamantinoma arising in the distal fibula treated with distal fibulectomy: A case report and review of the literature.Foot Ankle Int1997;18:746-51.
9. Norman-TaylorFH, SweetnamDI, FixsenJA. Distalfibulectomy for Ewing’s sarcoma.J Bone Joint Surg Br1994;76:559-62.
10. KanayaK, WadaT, KuraH, YamashitaT, UsuiM, IshiiS.Valgus deformity of the ankle following harvesting of a vascularized fibular graft in children.J ReconstrMicrosurg2002;18:91-6.
11. JonesRB, IshikawaSN, RichardsonEG, MurphyGA. Effect of distal fibular resection on ankle laxity.Foot Ankle Int2001;22:590-3.
12. MannRA, RongstadKM. Arthrodesis of the ankle: A critical analysis.Foot Ankle Int1998;19:3-9.
13. DurakK, BilgenO, KaleliT, AydinliU. Distal fibula resection in osteochondroma.J Int Med Res1996;24:381-6.
14. deGauzy JS, KanyJ, CahuzacJP. Distal fibular reconstruction with pedicled vascularized fibular head graft: A case report.J PediatrOrthop B2002;11:176-80.
15. EgerW, SchörleC, ZeilerG. Giant cell tumor of the distal fibula: Fifteenyear result after en bloc resection and fibula reconstruction.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2004;124:56-9.
16. PickeringR. Arthrodesis of ankle, knee, and hip. In: PickeringRM, editors. Campbell’s Operative Orthopaedics. 10th ed. St Louis, MO, USA: Mosby; 2003.
17. SaridisAG, MegasPD, GeorgiouCS, DiamantakisGM, TyllianakisME. Dual-fibular reconstruction of a massive tibial defect after Ewing’s sarcoma resection in a pediatric patient with a vascular variation.J PediatrOrthop2011;31:297-302.
18. VaseenonT, SaengsinJ, KamintaA, PattamapaspongN, SettakornJ, PruksakornD.Ankle ligament reconstruction after wide resection of the osteosarcoma of the distal fibula: A case report.BMC Res Notes2017;10:769.
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]
Like this:
Local Recurrences of Giant Cell Tumor of Bones after Extended Surgical Curettage – A Retrospective Cohort Study
Original Article | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | JBST January-April 2020 | Page 9-12 | DOI: 10.13107/jbst.2020.v06i01.007
Author: Dominic K Puthur [1], Dijoe Davis [1], N Sanjay [1]
1. Department of Orthopaedics, Amala Institute of Medical Sciences, Thrissur, Kerala, India.
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Dijoe Davis,
Department of Orthopaedics, Amala Institute of Medical Sciences,
Cloud Nine, Kollannur Villas, Jasmin Road, Near Water Tank Street
Nehrunagar, Kuriachira P.O, Thrissur – 680 006, Kerala, India.
E-mail: dr.dijoe@gmail.com
Abstract
Introduction: Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) is a locally aggressive tumor well known for recurrence after surgical treatment. Local recurrence rate ranged from 10 to 25%. The objectives of this study are to find out the incidence of recurrence in GCT after extended surgical curettage, factors affecting recurrence, and also to find the best modality of treatment available for the recurred GCT.
Materials and Methods: It was a retrospective cohort study of 225 patients diagnosed and treated by extended surgical curettage in the Orthopaedic Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India, between January 2003 and December 2017. Patients were followed up clinically and radiologically for diagnosis of recurrence. Factors affecting the recurrence were analyzed. These recurrent cases were further followed up. IBM SPSS v23 was used for data analysis such as age, gender, site of lesion and side, and material used to fill the defect after curettage. Descriptive statistics was elaborated in the form of means and standard deviations for continuous variables and frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. Fisher’s exact test is used for comparison.
Results: Recurrence was found in 27 patients of 225 cases of GCTB treated by extended surgical curettage. These include 9 of 135 cases initially treated by extended curettage and bone cement and 18 of 88 cases initially treated by curettage and bone graft. Recurrence was found to be more common in males than females.
Conclusions: Local recurrence is significantly lower in patients treated by cementation following extended surgical curettage than bone graft which makes bone cement as a better filling material with regard to recurrence.
Keywords: Giant cell tumor, Curettage, Bone cement, Bone graft, South India.
References
1. Fletcher CD. Who Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.
2. Puri A, Agarwal M. Treatment of giant cell tumor of bone: Current concepts. Indian J Orthop 2007;41:101-8.
3. Sobti A, Agrawal P, Agarwala S, Agarwal M. Giant cell tumor of bone-an overview. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2016;4:2-9.
4. Rao PT. Management of giant cell tumor of bone. Kini memorial oration. Indian J Orthop 1993;27:96-100.
5. Huvos AG. Bone Tumors: Diagnosis, Treatment and Prognosis. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Co.; 1991. p. 429.
6. Reddy CR, Rao PS, Rajakumari K. Giant cell tumour of bone in South India. J Bone Joint Surg 1974;56:617-9, 106-114.
7. Ghert MA, Rizzo M, Harrelson JM, Scully SP. Giant-cell tumor of the appendicular skeleton. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;400:201-10.
8. Saiz P, Virkus W, Piasecki P, Templeton A, Shott S, Gitelis S. Results of giant cell tumor of bone treated with intralesional excision. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;424:221-6.
9. Cavanna L, Biasini C, Monfredo M, Maniscalco P, Mori M. Giant cell tumor of bone. Oncologist 2014;19:1207.
10. Turcotte RE. Giant cell tumor of bone. Orthop Clin North Am 2006;37:35-51.
11. Nelson DA, Barker ME, Hamlin BH. Thermal effects of acrylic cementation at bone tumour sites. Int J Hyperthermia 1997;13:287-306.
12. Nicholson NC, Ramp WK, Kneisl JS, Kaysinger KK. Hydrogen peroxide inhibits giant cell tumor and osteoblast metabolism in vitro. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998;347:250-60.
13. Quint U, Müller RT, Müller G. Characteristics of phenol. Instillation in intralesional tumor excision of chondroblastoma, osteoclastoma and enchondroma. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1998;117:43-6.
14. Balke M, Ahrens H, Streitbuerger A, Koehler G, Winkelmann W, Gosheger G, et al. Treatment options for recurrent giant cell tumors of bone. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2009;135:149-58.
15. Klenke FM, Wenger DE, Inwards CY, Rose PS, Sim FH. Recurrent giant cell tumor of long bones: Analysis of surgical management. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:1181-7.
16. Puthoor DK, Puthezhath K. Management of giant cell tumor of bone: Computerized tomography based selection strategy and approaching the lesion through the site of cortical break. Orthop Surg 2012;4:76-82.
17. Puthoor D, Iype W. Giant cell tumor: Curettage and bone grafting. Indian J Orthop 2007;41:121-3.
18. Dominic K, Dijoe D, Aravind R. Extended curettage and reconstruction with proximal fibula for treating giant cell tumor of lateral femoral condyle: A prospective study. Arch Clin Exp Surg 2017;6:1.
19. Puthoor DK, Davis D, Francis L. The incidence and distribution of pathological fractures in giant cell tumour of bone-a retrospective study. Kerala J Orthop 2018;31920:27-31.
20. Campanacci M, Baldini N, Boriani S, Sudanese A. Giant-cell tumor of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:106-14.
21. Lausten GS, Jensen PK, Schiødt T, Lund B. Local recurrences in giant cell tumour of bone. Long-term follow up of 31 cases. Int Orthop 1996;20:172-6.
22. Vult von Steyern F, Bauer HC, Trovik C, Kivioja A, Bergh P, Holmberg Jörgensen P, et al. Treatment of local recurrences of giant cell tumour in long bones after curettage and cementing. A Scandinavian sarcoma group
study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88:531-5.
23. Turcotte RE, Wunder JS, Isler MH, Bell RS, Schachar N, Masri BA, et al. Giant cell tumor of long bone: A Canadian sarcoma group study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;397:248-58.
24. Nahal A, Ajlan A, Alcindor T, Turcotte R. Dedifferentiated giant cell tumour of bone in the form of low-grade fibroblastic osteogenic sarcoma: Case report of a unique presentation with follow-up. Curr Oncol
2010;17:71-6.
25. Bertoni F, Bacchini P, Staals EL. Malignancy in giant cell tumor of bone. Cancer 2003;97:2520-9.
26. Mendenhall WM, Zlotecki RA, Scarborough MT, Gibbs CP, Mendenhall NP. Giant cell tumor of bone. Am J Clin Oncol 2006;29:96-9.
27. Tubbs WS, Brown LR, Beabout JW, Rock MG, Unni KK. Benign giantcell tumor of bone with pulmonary metastases: Clinical findings and radiologic appearance of metastases in 13 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol
1992;158:331-4.
28. Dahlin DC. Caldwell lecture. Giant cell tumor of bone: Highlights of 407 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985;144:955-60.
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]
Like this:
Factors Predicting Massive Blood Loss in Patients Undergoing Pelvic Resection: A Tertiary Referral Center Experience from North India
Original Article | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | JBST January-April 2020 | Page 5-8 | DOI: 10.13107/jbst.2020.v06i01.006
Author: Devansh Goyal [1], Venkatesan Sampath Kumar [1], Roshan Banjara [1], Abdul Majeed [1],
R Namith [1], Shah Alam Khan [1]
1. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Venkatesan Sampath Kumar,
Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical
Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi – 110 029, India.
E-mail: venkatortho4@gmail.com
Abstract
Background: Pelvic resections are challenging procedures with significant risk of morbidity, especially massive blood loss. Risk factors for massive blood loss are understudied due to the rarity of such procedures.
Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on pelvic resections performed between January 2018 and October 2019. Intraoperative and perioperative data were collected from prospectively collected database and hospital medical records. Patients were divided into two groups– Group 1 with intraoperative blood loss <2 L and Group 2 with blood loss 2 L or more. Demographic data, tumor characteristics, surgical procedure, and perioperative outcomes were studied between the two groups. Patients in whom only soft-tissue resections were performed and those who did not have complete data were excluded from the study.
Results: Of the 27 patients identified, 2 had soft-tissue recurrence resections only and 4 had incomplete data and were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 21 patients, 8 were classified into Group 1 and 13 into Group 2. On studying the various characteristics, tumor type, tumor volume, type of pelvic resection, and duration of procedure were significantly different between the two groups. Although wound complications, 30-day mortality, and read missions were higher in Group 2, this difference was not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Massive blood loss was more common in chondrosarcoma patients, with tumor volume more than 300 cc and the duration of procedure more than 4 h with resection involving the acetabulum and pubis (Type I/II/III and Type I/II/III/IV).
Keywords: Blood loss, Pelvic resections, Perioperative morbidity, Pelvic tumor surgery, Tumor volume.
References
1. AbuduA, GrimerRJ, CannonSR, CarterSR, SneathRS. Reconstruction of the hemipelvis after the excision of malignant tumours. Complications and functional outcome of prostheses.J Bone Joint Surg Br1997;79:773-9.
2. WurtzLD, PeabodyTD, SimonMA. Delay in the diagnosis and treatment of primary bone sarcoma of the pelvis.J Bone Joint Surg Am1999;81:317- 25.
3. CarterSR, EastwoodDM, GrimerRJ, SneathRS. Hindquarter amputation for tumours of the musculoskeletal system.J Bone Joint Surg Br1990;72:490-3.
4. EnnekingWF, DunhamWK. Resection and reconstruction for primary neoplasms involving the innominate bone.J Bone Joint Surg Am1978;60:731-46.
5. KawaiA, KadotaH, YamaguchiU, MorimotoY, OzakiT, BeppuY. Blood loss and transfusion associated with musculoskeletal tumor surgery.J Surg Oncol2005;92:52-8.
6. SatcherRL Jr., O’DonnellRJ, JohnstonJO. Reconstruction of the pelvis after resection of tumors about the acetabulum.Clin OrthopRelat Res2003;409:209-17.
7. GutierrezG, ReinesHD, Wulf-GutierrezME. Clinical review: Hemorrhagic shock.Crit Care2004;8:373-81.
8. EnnekingWF, SpanierSS, GoodmanMA. A system for the surgical staging of musculoskeletal sarcoma.Clin OrthopRelat Res1980;153:106- 20.
9. AliAlgadiem E, AleisaAA, AlsubaieHI, BuhlaiqahNR, AlgadeebJB, AlsneiniHA. Blood loss estimation using gauze visual analogue.Trauma Mon2016;21:e34131.
10. GöbelV, JürgensH, EtspülerG, KemperdickH, JungblutRM, StienenU, et al. Prognostic significance of tumor volume in localized Ewing’s sarcoma o f b o n e i n c h i l d r e n a n d a d o l e s c e n t s . J C a n c e r R e s C l i n
Oncol1987;113:187-91.
11. RiedelRF, LarrierN, DoddL, KirschD, MartinezS, BrigmanBE. The clinical management of chondrosarcoma.Curr Treat Options Oncol2009;10:94-106.
12. TangX, GuoW, YangR, TangS, JiT. Evaluation of blood loss during limb salvage surgery for pelvic tumours.Int Orthop2009;33:751-6.
13. AljassirF, BeadelGP, TurcotteRE, GriffinAM, BellRS, WunderJS, et al. Outcome after pelvic sarcoma resection reconstructed with saddle prosthesis.Clin OrthopRelat Res2005;438:36-41.
14. BeneveniaJ, CyranFP, BiermannJS, PattersonFR, LeesonMC. Treatment of advanced metastatic lesions of the acetabulum using the saddle prosthesis.Clin OrthopRelat Res2004;426:23-31.
15. VenaVE, HsuJ, RosierRN, O’KeefeRJ. Pelvic reconstruction for severe periacetabular metastatic disease.Clin OrthopRelat Res1999;362:171-80.
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]
Like this:
Unicameral Bone Cyst
Vol 5 | Issue 3 | September – December 2019 | page: 8-12| Vineet Kurisunkal, Manish Pruthi, Ashish Gulia. 10.13107/jbst.2019.v05i03.017
Author: Vineet Kurisunkal[1], Manish Pruthi[2], Ashish Gulia[3]
[1]M.S. Ortho, Fellowship in Musculoskeletal Oncology (HBNI)
Senior Clinical Fellow, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom
[2]M.S. Ortho, DNB Ortho, Fellowship in Musculoskeletal Oncology (HBNI)
Consultant Orthopaedic Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute, New Delhi
[3]M.S. Ortho, McH Surgical Oncology
Professor, Orthopaedic Oncology, Dept. Of Surgical Oncology
Tata Memorial Hospital, HBNI, Mumbai
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Ashish Gulia
Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Dr. E Borges Road, Parel, Mumbai – 400 012, India.
Abstract
Introduction:
Unicameral bone cyst (UBC) is a benign cystic lesion of the bone also known as simple bone cyst or solitary bone cyst. It was first recognized by Virchow in 1876. (1) Although exact incidence is not known, UBC’s accounts for 3% of all bone tumors with a male to female ratio of 2:1(2). Proximal humerus and proximal femur are the two most common sites for occurrence and accounts for approximately 80% of cases. Most of the UBC’s are recognized in age between 9 to 13 years, and the lesions usually heal by skeletal maturity. They are unilocular, serous or sero-sanguineous fluid filled bone cavity usually seen in metaphyseal region of long bones. It was originally recognized by Virchow in 1876 and subsequently studied in detail by Jaffe and Lichtenstein in 1942 (1)
Etiopathogenesis:
The etiopathogenesis of UBC is still very unsure, several theories have been postulated namely (3)
1. Virchow’s theory: Hypothesized the occurrence due to abnormalities in the local circulation of the affected area of bone.
2. Jaffe and Lichtenstein theory: Cystic cavity develops secondary to a traumatic insult leading to change in local circulation.
3. Mirra theory: On electron microscopy lesions appeared like intraosseous synovial cysts
4. Cohen’s theory: Hypothesized that the cyst forms as a response to venous occlusion in the intramedullary space.
5. Histopathologically: The lining of cavity contains synovial cells. On further evaluation of the cyst fluid high levels of oxygen free radicals and prostaglandins (prostaglandin E2, interleukin-1 and proteolytic enzymes) were found which have inherent ability to increase bone resorption hence create a cystic intramedullary cavity.
Epidemiology & Clinical features:
UBCs are lesions which arise in first two decades of life (85%) with 50% of lesions being detected in first decade itself and are rare to occur beyond age of 20 years. These Lesions show strong male predominance with male to female ratio of 2:1. (2) About 90% of cases occur in the proximal humerus, proximal femur and proximal tibia out of which most common location is the humerus (55% cases). Other less common sites are the ilium, distal humerus, tibia, calcaneum, talus, radius, ulna, and ribs. (4)
Patients are usually asymptomatic. Most lesions are picked up incidentally on plain radiographs when the patient presents following a history of fall or trauma or sport related injury. Few children present with pain after strenuous work or sports injury. (5)
Radiological Description:
UBC appears as a large, localized lytic lesion in the epimetaphyseal region of long bones. It appears expansile with a narrow zone of transition and a clear matrix. The adjacent matrix appears thinned with a well contained lesion. (6) A loculated appearance is due to the presence of ridges over the inner surface of the cyst rather than bony partitions, but following the healing of a fracture fibro osseous septa may actually form. Occasionally, a fragment of the fractured cyst wall is found in the fluid cavity which gives appearance to the pathognomic ‘fallen leaf sign”. (7) The cystic cavity may appear partially ossified or have septations after fracture or treatment. Mixed lytic sclerotic areas may be present in relapse cases.
Rarely magnetic resonance imaging may be warranted which reveals a single well contained lytic lesion with central fluid collection in primary cases. In the presence of previous healed pathological fractures across the cyst leads to formation of fibroosseous septations giving the appearance of an aneursymal bone cyst showing multiple fluid fluid levels. (8)
Histopathological Description:
Gross examination:
Fusiform expansion of the bone is noted with a classical description of being “egg shell” thin, semi translucent, bluish, and easily penetrable. (5) The cavity is a single lined cavity containing yellow fluid often appearing serosanguinous to hemorrhagic if there is associated history of trauma. Following a healed fracture, the cavity may become divided by fibro osseous septa. A thin layer of grey connective tissue lines the inner surface of the cyst wall, which displays multiple scroll like ridges that account for the pseudoloculated appearance on roentgenograms. (8)
Microscopy:
The cortical wall is composed of loosely trabeculated osseous tissue, and many thin walled vessels. The connective tissue is composed of layers of flattened cells (fibroblasts) lying on vascular collagenous or myxomatous tissue containing multinucleated giant cells, foam cells containing hemosiderin and lipids. (9) Following a fracture, periosteal new bone apposition may be evident. Recent literature reviews have revealed a number of new markers and histone mutations for differentiating benign from malignant tumours ie: Histone 3 mutations like H3F3A which is specific for giant cell tumours and H3F3B which is specific for chondroblastomas, these mutations help in differentiating from other giant cell containing tumours. (10)
Differential Diagnosis for UBC:
Varied benign and inflammatory bone lesion often lead to a misdiagnosis of unicameral bone cyst (5, 6) e.g.: Aneurysmal Bone Cyst (ABC), Fibrous Dysplasia with cystic changes, Enchondroma, Eosinphilic granuloma
ABC’s are eccentrically located lesions occurring near the metadiaphysis. Radiologically ABC’s show a significant expansion of the cortex, unlike the mild concentric expansion was seen in UBCs and show multiple fluid fluid levels which is pathognomic for ABC’s
Fibrous dysplasias are centrally located in the metadiaphyseal area occurring within the same age distribution. Radiographically lesion is usually “ground-glass” density.
An enchondroma has less sclerotic margins than the unicameral bone cyst and often contains a chondroid matrix and are usually located in the short tubular bones of the hands and feet.
Eosinphilic granuloma frequently involves axial skeleton than appendicular skeleton. Spinal Colum involvement is mostly seen in children. These are most destructive lytic lesion with associated soft tissue component and vertebral fracture or vertebra plana.
Treatment of UBC:
UBC’s are treated based on their stage at diagnosis. UBC’s could be latent or active, if a UBC has been diagnosed during its latent stage its most likely to be an incidental pick up which can be observed closely and should be followed up clinico – radiologically till healing. If during the observation phase there is an increase in the size or symptoms, it implies that lesion should be in the active stage of the disease and this should be intervened and treated. (6)
Treatment approach depends on the stage of UBC at presentation. Goal of treatment in UBC is to regain cortical thickness, bone strength and achieve healing of cyst. (3,11) If a lesion presents with a pathological fracture through the upper limb and is minimally displaced should be splinted and closely observed, there are studies which show cases spontaneously heal without any surgical intervention, the remaining cases have to be surgically stabilized. (4)
In lower limb defects, the treatment approach aims at aggressive surgical intervention so as to prevent any untoward event like occurrence of a pathological fracture. In a meta-analysis of 3217 cysts, healing after conservative treatment was 65% (27-100%). (3) In another study by Traub et al, healing after a conservative treatment was 70%. (12) However, in the study by Neer et al, healing of cysts after a conservative treatment was very low (4%) and was statistically low from healing after surgical procedures (77%) (p<0.001). (13) Also, subsequent fractures, growth disturbances and deformity were more common in the conservative treatment group.
In the meta-analysis of 62 studies (3217 cysts) mentioned earlier, the pool estimate of bone marrow injections was similar to steroid injections, 77.9% (65.9-89.9%). (3) The healing rates were improved when demineralized bone matrix was added. Healing rates after curettage were 90% while treatment with Intramedullary nails had almost 100% healing rates for UBC’s of long bones.
Based on the published literature, various treatment options have been suggested for the treatment of UBC’s. These can be broadly divided into 2 categories – (4, 8, 11, and 14)
a) Percutaneous interventions:
i. Percutaneous aspiration of the cyst fluid and steroid injection – When a corticosteroid is injected into a unicameral bone cyst, the cyst will heal in most cases by new bone formation.
Method: This is done by two needle method. Needles are introduced into the cavity to allow free escape of cystic fluid. Removal of fluid should be thorough so that the injected suspension of prednisolone acetate crystals can cover the whole cyst wall cavity. Up to 200 mg can be injected depending up on the size of the cavity. Generally, repeat injections are required. The injection does not appear to impair the growth of the epiphyseal plate, and no biochemical disturbances have been noted. Commercially available bone substitute material can be injected in to the cavity to provide osteogenic potential and rapid healing.
ii. Percutaneous aspiration of the cyst fluid and autogenous bone-marrow injection.
iii. Percutaneous aspiration of the cyst fluid and demineralized bone matrix injection
iv. Percutaneous aspiration of the cyst fluid and demineralized bone matrix combined with bone-
marrow injection.
v. Percutaneous drilling and Kirschner wires, Cannulated screws, or flexible intramedullary nails insertion to provide continuous decompression of the cyst.
b) Surgical procedures:
Principles of surgical intervention in a case of UBC’s:
i. The fracture should be allowed to heal with splinting if required maintaining limb length
ii. Adequate sized bone window should be made for curettage
iii. The reduce recurrence cyst wall cavity should be completely excised
iv. Avoid damaging the growth plate in order to avoid angular deformities
v. Cavity may be filled with bone grafts or bone graft substitutes
vi. Periosteum should be preserved for inducing osteogenesis
vii. Recurrent lesions may require subperiosteal resection
Described surgical techniques are:
i. Limited Curettage and bone grafting: This is the classical method of curettage where a small bony window is made and curettage is attempted through this cavity. This method is associated with a high rate of local recurrence due to inadequate disease clearance
ii. Extended intralesional curettage and bone grafting: Extended curettage is done by making an adequately sized bony window and post curettage all intervening bony septae and cyst membrane are broken down using a high-speed burr. The residual cavity is reconstructed using auto or allografts.
iii. Partial Resection and Bone Grafts: Subtotal excision of the cavity is done leaving only a small longitudinal portion of host bone to maintain length and stability. A strut of auto/allograft or in combination with morsellized bone graft can be used to fill the defect. The preserved periosteum is closed over the grafts.
Complications:
• Immediate Complications:
i. Pathological Fractures
ii. Angular Deformities
iii. Limb Length Discrepancy
• They are also associated with increased chance of local recurrence which ranges from 10 to as high as 80 percent
References
1) Sung AD, Anderson ME, Zurakowski D, Hornicek FJ, Gebhardt MC. Unicameral bone cyst: a retrospective study of three surgical treatments. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(10):2519-26.
2) Kaelin, Andre & D. MacEwen, G. (1989). Unicameral bone cysts. International Orthopaedics. 13. 275-282. 10.1007/BF00268511.
3) Kadhim, M., Thacker, M., Kadhim, A., & Holmes, L. (2014). Treatment of unicameral bone cyst: systematic review and meta analysis. Journal of children’s orthopaedics, 8(2), 171-91.
4) Ulici, A., Balanescu, R., Topor, L., & Barbu, M. (2012). The modern treatment of the simple bone cysts. Journal of medicine and life, 5(4), 469-73.
5) Evans J, Blake J. Unicameral Bone Cyst. [Updated 2019 Feb 24]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2019 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470587/
6) Noordin, S., Allana, S., Umer, M., Jamil, M., Hilal, K., & Uddin, N. (2018). Unicameral bone cysts: Current concepts. Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 34, 43-49. doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2018.06.005
7) S. Struhl, M.D., C. Edelson, M.D., H. Pritzker, M.D., L.P. Seimon, M.D., and H.D. Dorfman, M.D. Solitary (unicameral) bone cyst The fallen fragment sign revisited. Skeletal Radiology (1989) 18:261-265
8) Donaldson, S., Chundamala, J., Yandow, S., & Wright, J. G. (2010). Treatment for unicameral bone cysts in long bones: an evidence based review. Orthopedic reviews, 2(1), e13.
9) Aiba, Hisaki & Kobayashi, Masaaki & Waguri-Nagaya, Yuko & Goto, Hideyuki & Mizutani, Jun & Yamada, Satoshi & Okamoto, Hideki & Nozaki, Masahiro & Mitsui, Hiroto & Miwa, Shinji & Kobayashi, Makoto & Endo, Kojiro & Saito, Shiro & Goto, Taeko & Otsuka, Takanobu. (2018). Treatment of aneurysmal bone cysts using endoscopic curettage. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 19. 10.1186/s12891-018-2176-6.
10) Cleven, Arjen & Höcker, Saskia & Bruijn, Inge & Szuhai, Karoly & Cleton-Jansen, Anne-Marie & Bovee, Judith. (2015). Mutation Analysis of H3F3A and H3F3B as a Diagnostic Tool for Giant Cell Tumor of Bone and Chondroblastoma. The American journal of surgical pathology. 39. 1576-1583. 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000512.
11) Kadhim, Muayad & Sethi, Samir & M. Thacker, Mihir. (2016). Unicameral Bone Cysts in the Humerus: Treatment Outcomes. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 36. 392-399.
12) Traub, Frank & Eberhardt, Oliver & F. Fernandez, Fransico & Wirth, Thomas. (2016). Solitary bone cyst: A comparison of treatment options with special reference to their long-term outcome. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 17. 10.1186/s12891-016-1012-0.
13) Alshryda, Sattar & Wright, James. (2017). Evidence-Based Treatment of Simple Bone Cyst. 10.1007/978-3-319-41142-2_43.
14) Fauzi Kamal, A., A. Ajiantoro, and Y. Prabowo. “Simple Bone Cyst Treated With Percutaneous Steroid Injection”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 11, no. 5, May 2018, pp. 186-90, doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i5.21775.
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF]
Like this:
Editorial September – December 2019
Editorial | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | JBST September – December 2019 | Page 21 | Yogesh Panchwagh, Ashish Gulia, Ashok Shyam. 10.13107/jbst.2019.v05i03.014
Author: Dr. Yogesh Panchwagh[1], Dr. Ashish Gulia[2] & Dr. Ashok Shyam[3],[4]
[1]Orthopaedic Oncology Clinic, Pune, India.
[2]Orthopedic Oncology Services, Department of Surgical Oncology,
Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai.
[3]Indian Orthopaedic Research Group, Thane, India
[4]Sancheti Institute for Orthopaedics &Rehabilitation, Pune, India
Address of Correspondence
Dr. Yogesh Panchwagh.
Orthopaedic Oncology Clinic, 101, Vasant plot 29, Bharat Kunj
Society -2, Erandwana, Pune – 38, India.
Email: drpanchwagh@gmail.com
JBST has completed 5 years of publication. At present, JBST is indexed with Index Copernicus, ETH Bibliothek and Google scholar while the process of Pubmed indexation is in pipeline. Being the official journal of the Indian Musculoskeletal Oncology Society (IMSOS), most of the contributions to the journal have come from the members of IMSOS. There have been respectable international contributions too, mostly in form of review articles. We have noticed that the original research articles which JBST would like to emphasize on currently, are far and few to be submitted. We feel one of the main reason for this could be the pending pubmed indexation.
The awareness about need of publications is already there in the subcontinent. We believe that there is tremendous clinical work ongoing. The data analysis and writing of the manuscripts, which earlier was in the backseat, also is on the rise currently. Most of the educational institutes now look at the research done and published by the faculty to decide on multitude of factors like enhancing financial aid, giving additional manpower and deciding on appraisals and promotions. This boosts the need of doing more research and publishing it.
When an author thinks of sending his or her original research work to a journal, the main thing that plays a role is the indexation. It simply is a reflection on how the journal is valued, how much of a difference it’s making in the concerned field and whether the processes followed are up to a certain standard. This in turn gives a certain credibility to the journal. However, there were certain branches, orthopaedic oncology being one, where there was dearth of a journal dedicated to the field. JBST aimed at filling the void and giving an option to the researchers to publish their hard work which otherwise takes a long time to find its way to the online or print version of journals dedicated to a broader speciality. Our focus was and always will be quick turnaround time, good quality and being clinician and researcher friendly. Considering that most clinicians and students would have limited budget allocation, we have kept the publishing fees to the bare minimum. In fact, for the life members of the affiliated societies of the journal, JBST is happy to waive off the publishing fees.
As we continue to walk the path that we had set our feet on, we would like to thank all our authors, reviewers, editorial board members and readers for the pivotal role that they have played over the years in shaping JBST. With continued help and support by the above mentioned, we hope to continue improving and getting better.
Dr. Yogesh Panchwagh
Dr. Ashish Gulia
Dr. Ashok Shyam
[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]
Like this: