| Literature DB >> 31014317 |
Georg W Omlor1, Jessica Lange2, Marcus Streit2, Simone Gantz2, Christian Merle2, Thomas Germann3, Gunhild Mechtersheimer4, Jörg Fellenberg2, Burkhard Lehner2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Giant cell tumor of the bone (GCT) has high local recurrence rates and the prognosis is hard to predict. We therefore retrospectively analyzed clinical outcome and recurrences of 51 GCT cases focusing on the effects of adjuvant local use of hydrogen peroxide.Entities:
Keywords: Bone cement; Curettage; Giant cell tumor; Hydrogen peroxide; Intralesional resection
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31014317 PMCID: PMC6480805 DOI: 10.1186/s12957-019-1613-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Surg Oncol ISSN: 1477-7819 Impact factor: 2.754
Fig. 1Intralesional resection strategy with bone cement filling and additional osteosynthesis at the proximal tibia (a) and distal femur (b) with preoperative images (on the left) and postoperative images (on the right)
Treatment strategies with tumor characteristics and surgical and clinical parameter including the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score at final follow-up. Mean (± standard deviation) and median (range) are depicted
| Lesion size at surgery in cm3 | Number of recurrences | Satisfaction (0–10) | Disability (0–3) | MSTS-score (0–30) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total ( | 52 (± 48) | 21 | 9 (4–10) | 0 (0–2) | 28 (15–30) |
| Curettage with H2O2 ( | 58 (± 50) | 6 | 9 (4–10) | 0 (0–2) | 28 (16–30) |
| Curettage without H2O2 ( | 46 (± 46) | 15 | 9 (5–10) | 0 (0–2) | 27 (15–30) |
Fig. 2Box plots with preoperative tumor sizes in cubic centimeter. Size differences between cases treated with or without hydrogen peroxide were not significant
Recurrence rates with likelihood ratios and cumulative recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates at 2 years follow-up (2YFU), 5 years follow-up (5YFU), and 10 years follow-up (10YFU). Results are depicted for the whole collective and for cases with surgery at own institution (in domo) and surgery elsewhere (ex domo). Statistically significant hydrogen peroxide effects were found for all cases treated in domo and for the whole collective
|
| Recurrences (recurrence rate) | Likelihood ratio of recurrence (chi-square test) | 2YFU-RFS (standard error) | 5YFU-RFS (standard error) | 10YFU-RFS (standard error) | Log-rank test for differences in RFS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whole collective |
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Surgery in domo | 39 | 11 (0.28) | 11.9 ( | 0.72 (0.08) | 0.68 (0.08) | 0.68 (0.08) | |
| Surgery ex domo | 12 | 10 (0.83) | 0.42 (0.14) | 0.17 (0.11) | 0.17 (0.11) | ||
| With H2O2 (in domo) | 24 | 4 (0.17) | 4.1 ( | 0.86 (0.07) | 0.79 (0.10) | 0.79 (0.10) | |
| Without H2O2 (in domo) | 15 | 7 (0.47) | 0.48 (0.14) | 0.48 (0.14) | 0.48 (0.14) | ||
| With H2O2 (whole collective) | 27 | 6 (0.22) | 8.8 ( | 0.80 (0.08) | 0.74 (0.09) | 0.74 (0.09) | |
| Without H2O2 (whole collective) | 24 | 15 (0.63) | 0.47 (0.11) | 0.31 (0.10) | 0.31 (0.10) |
Fig. 3Recurrence rates depending on whether hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) was used or not to clean the tumor cavity after curettage: Significantly less recurrences were found after hydrogen peroxide treatment in the group of patients with surgery at our institution (a; n = 39) and in the whole collective (b; n = 51)
Fig. 4Kaplan-Meier analysis of cumulative recurrence-free survival (RFS). Survival curves are presented for the whole collective (a), for cases with surgery at our institution (in domo) versus surgery elsewhere (ex domo) (b), and for treatment with or without hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in domo (c) and for the whole collective (d)
Fig. 5Analysis of cell viability (a) and apoptosis induction (b) after high-dose short-time hydrogen peroxide treatment of n = 5 primary GCT-derived stromal cell lines. Low-dose long-time treatment showed equal effects on cell viability (c) and apoptosis induction (d) (**p < 0.01)