Robert Koucheki1,2, Aaron Gazendam3,4, Jonathan Perera5, Anthony Griffin4, Peter Ferguson4,6, Jay Wunder4,6, Kim Tsoi4,6. 1. Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Robert.koucheki@mail.utoronto.ca. 2. Institute of Biomedical Engineering, Toronto, ON, Canada. Robert.koucheki@mail.utoronto.ca. 3. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 5. Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust, Greater London, UK. 6. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The treatment of giant cell tumors (GCT) of the distal radius remains challenging, with no consensus on the optimal surgical management. Surgical management remains the mainstay of treatment with options including intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection with reconstruction. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of these two procedures. METHODS: Using OVID-Medline and Embase databases, a systematic literature search was performed. Comparative studies, assessing intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection in patients with GCTs of the distal radius, were included. Data regarding rates of local recurrence, metastasis, overall complications, and functional outcomes, were collected and analyzed. The ROBINS-I tool was utilized for risk of bias appraisal within each study outcome. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (n = 373 patients) reporting on 191 intralesional curettage procedures and 182 en-bloc resections were included in the analysis. The average age of participants was 31.9 (SD ± 2.4) years and average follow-up was 7.1 (SD ± 3.6) years. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage were more likely to develop local recurrence (Risk Ratio (RR) 3.3, 95% CI, [2.1, 5.4], p < 0.00001) when compared to patients that underwent en-bloc resection. In Campanacci grade 3 lesions, the risk for local recurrence was 5.9 (95% CI, [2.2, 16.3], p = 0.0006) times higher in patients that received intralesional curettage. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage showed an 84% reduction in the relative risk of developing overall complications compared to en-bloc resection (95% CI, [0.1, 0.4], p < 0.00001), and a larger decrease in Visual Analog Scale and lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores (p < 0.00001). Risk ratio for developing a local recurrence, with PMMA versus bone graft following an intralesional procedure was not significant (RR 1.2, 95% CI, [0.6, 2.6], p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: In the surgical management of GCT of the distal radius, intralesional curettage increased local recurrence compared to en-bloc resection with reconstruction, particularly in grade 3 tumors. However, it led to significantly fewer operative complications, lower pain scores, and improved functional outcomes compared to en-bloc resection. Both treatment options remain relevant in the contemporary management of GCTs of the distal radius. Surgical decision making should include both patient and tumor factors when determining the optimal treatment strategy for these patients. LEVEL 3 EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis of Level 3 studies.
PURPOSE: The treatment of giant cell tumors (GCT) of the distal radius remains challenging, with no consensus on the optimal surgical management. Surgical management remains the mainstay of treatment with options including intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection with reconstruction. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of these two procedures. METHODS: Using OVID-Medline and Embase databases, a systematic literature search was performed. Comparative studies, assessing intralesional curettage and en-bloc resection in patients with GCTs of the distal radius, were included. Data regarding rates of local recurrence, metastasis, overall complications, and functional outcomes, were collected and analyzed. The ROBINS-I tool was utilized for risk of bias appraisal within each study outcome. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (n = 373 patients) reporting on 191 intralesional curettage procedures and 182 en-bloc resections were included in the analysis. The average age of participants was 31.9 (SD ± 2.4) years and average follow-up was 7.1 (SD ± 3.6) years. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage were more likely to develop local recurrence (Risk Ratio (RR) 3.3, 95% CI, [2.1, 5.4], p < 0.00001) when compared to patients that underwent en-bloc resection. In Campanacci grade 3 lesions, the risk for local recurrence was 5.9 (95% CI, [2.2, 16.3], p = 0.0006) times higher in patients that received intralesional curettage. Patients that underwent intralesional curettage showed an 84% reduction in the relative risk of developing overall complications compared to en-bloc resection (95% CI, [0.1, 0.4], p < 0.00001), and a larger decrease in Visual Analog Scale and lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores (p < 0.00001). Risk ratio for developing a local recurrence, with PMMA versus bone graft following an intralesional procedure was not significant (RR 1.2, 95% CI, [0.6, 2.6], p = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: In the surgical management of GCT of the distal radius, intralesional curettage increased local recurrence compared to en-bloc resection with reconstruction, particularly in grade 3 tumors. However, it led to significantly fewer operative complications, lower pain scores, and improved functional outcomes compared to en-bloc resection. Both treatment options remain relevant in the contemporary management of GCTs of the distal radius. Surgical decision making should include both patient and tumor factors when determining the optimal treatment strategy for these patients. LEVEL 3 EVIDENCE: Meta-analysis of Level 3 studies.
Authors: Hasan Abuhejleh; Jay S Wunder; Peter C Ferguson; Marc H Isler; Sophie Mottard; Joel A Werier; Anthony M Griffin; Robert E Turcotte Journal: Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Date: 2019-07-11
Authors: Frank M Klenke; Doris E Wenger; Carrie Y Inwards; Peter S Rose; Franklin H Sim Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2010-08-13 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Robert E Turcotte; Jay S Wunder; Marc H Isler; Robert S Bell; Norman Schachar; Bassam A Masri; Guy Moreau; Aileen M Davis Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Kabul C Saikia; Munin Borgohain; Sanjeev K Bhuyan; Sanjiv Goswami; Anjan Bora; Firoz Ahmed Journal: Indian J Orthop Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 1.251
Authors: Kevin A Raskin; Joseph H Schwab; Henry J Mankin; Dempsey S Springfield; Francis J Hornicek Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: R J O'Donnell; D S Springfield; H K Motwani; J E Ready; M C Gebhardt; H J Mankin Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 1994-12 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Cory J Broehm; Carrie Y Inwards; Alyaa Al-Ibraheemi; Doris E Wenger; Sarah M Jenkins; Long Jin; Andre M Oliveira; Riyam T Zreik; Jodi M Carter; Jennifer M Boland; Karen J Fritchie Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2018-02-17 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: Andreas F Mavrogenis; Vasileios G Igoumenou; Panayiotis D Megaloikonomos; Georgios N Panagopoulos; Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos; Panayotis N Soucacos Journal: SICOT J Date: 2017-09-14