| Literature DB >> 27999474 |
Thale M Asp Strøm1, Anette Torød Skeie2, Ingvild Koren Lobmaier3, Olga Zaikova1.
Abstract
Background. Pediatric giant cell tumor (GCT) of bone is rare and the course of the disease in the immature skeleton is sparsely described. We performed a retrospective study addressing symptoms, treatment, and outcome in children with GCT. Methods. Review of medical records and images of patients with GCT. Patients were detected from our hospital prospective database and those with open epiphyseal cartilages were included. Results. 16 children (75% girls) from 6 to 15 years old were identified. Eight lesions (50%) were in long bones and 4 (25%) in flat bones. One lesion appeared to be purely epiphyseal. All patients had pain as the initial symptom. Local recurrence developed in 2 patients. 14 of 16 patients returned to normal activity with no sequelae. One patient developed anisomelia after surgery. Conclusions. The biological tumor behavior in children does not seem to differ from what is reported in adults. Lesions in flat bones are very unusual, but our data alone do not provide enough evidence to conclude that this is more common in the immature skeleton. Literature review showed only one previous case report describing a purely epiphyseal GCT. Intralesional curettage is appropriate treatment and gives good functional results with acceptable recurrence rates.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27999474 PMCID: PMC5141298 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3079835
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sarcoma ISSN: 1357-714X
Figure 1Giant cell tumor (GCT) in fibula with secondary aneurysmal bone cyst. Treated with wide resection.
Figure 2(a) Characteristic histology of giant cell tumor: mononuclear cells with round to oval nuclei interspersed with numerous multinucleated giant cells. (b) Larger magnification of a typical multinucleated giant cell.
Patient characteristics.
| Sex | Age at diagnosis (years) | Symptom duration | Affected | Localization | Type of operation/reconstruction | Recurrence | Multicentric disease | Follow-up time (months) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient 1 | M | 14 | 1 | Tibia | P-MD | Curettage + cement | − | − | 119 |
| Patient 2 | F | 14 | 6 | Tibia | P-EM | Curettage + cement | − | + | 220 |
| Patient 3 | F | 12 | 48 | Fibula | P-MD | Excision | − | − | 50 |
| Patient 4 | F | 15 | 2 | Tibia | D-M | Curettage + cement | − | − | 48 |
| Patient 5 | F | 6 | 1 | Fibula | D-MD | Curettage + cement | + | − | 81 |
| Patient 6 | F | 9 | 1 | Tibia | P-E | Curettage + cement | − | − | 72 |
| Patient 7 | F | 15 | 5 | Fibula | D-MD | Curettage + autograft | − | − | 50 |
| Patient 8 | M | 15 | 6 | Radius | D-EMD | Curettage + allograft | + | − | 35 |
| Patient 9 | F | 10 | 4 | Sacrum | P | Curettage + cement | − | − | 90 |
| Patient 10 | F | 4 | 2 | Clavicle | P | Curettage + cement | − | − | 52 |
| Patient 11 | M | 6 | 2 | Clavicle | D | Curettage + cement | − | − | 59 |
| Patient 12 | F | 8 | 5 | Sacrum | P | Curettage | − | − | 47 |
| Patient 13 | F | 10 | 1 | Clavicle | D | Curettage + cement | − | − | 50 |
| Patient 14 | F | 8 | 12 | 3.metatarsal | Curettage + allograft | − | − | 28 | |
| Patient 15 | M | 9 | 2 | Scapula | Curettage | − | − | 19 | |
| Patient 16 | F | 10 | 6 | 3.metatarsal | Curettage | − | 17 |
Male (M), female (F), proximal (P), distal (D), epiphyseal (E), metaphyseal (M), and diaphyseal (D).
Figure 3(a) MRI of a purely epiphyseal giant cell tumor in a proximal tibia. (b) 9 months later the lesion had progressed to include the metaphysis as well.
Figure 4Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival curves for all patients under 16 years of age with giant cell tumor of bone (GCT) diagnosed and treated at our institution between 1984 and 2015.