Complications and outcomes of curettage, chemical cauterization and bone graft in giant cell tumor of bone

M. Shariful Alam; Monaim Hossain; Pathik Biswas; Rakibul Hasan; M. Jobayer Al Mahmud; Humayun Kabir

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20251801

Authors

M. Shariful Alam Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Monaim Hossain Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Pathik Biswas Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Rakibul Hasan Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh
M. Jobayer Al Mahmud Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Humayun Kabir Department of Orthopedics, National Institute of Traumatology and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation, Dhaka, Bangladesh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20251801

Keywords:

Bone grafting, Curettage, Chemical cauterization, Functional outcome, Giant cell tumor of bone, MSTS score, Orthopedic oncology, Pain reduction, Recurrence

Abstract

Background: Giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) is a locally aggressive benign bone neoplasm with a high potential for recurrence. While intralesional curettage remains the standard treatment, combining chemical cauterization and bone grafting may enhance therapeutic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the complications and outcomes of this combined approach in managing GCTB.

Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at the national institute of traumatology and orthopedic Rehabilitation (NITOR), Dhaka, Bangladesh, from September 2021 to March 2024. A total of 32 patients diagnosed with GCTB were treated using curettage, chemical cauterization and bone grafting. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scoring system, while complications and recurrence rates were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test and Chi-square test, with significance set at p<0.05.

Results: The mean MSTS score significantly improved from 58.8%±15.4% preoperatively to 85.2%±15.9% at the last follow-up (p<0.01). A low recurrence rate of 6.25% was observed. Pain levels, assessed by the visual analogue scale (VAS), significantly decreased from 4.3±1.2 to 2.1±1.5 (p=0.00002). Complications included joint stiffness (25%), superficial infections (9.38%) and early osteoarthritis (6.25%).

Conclusions: The combination of curettage, chemical cauterization and bone grafting proved to be an effective treatment strategy for GCTB, resulting in low recurrence, significant pain reduction and favorable functional outcomes. This approach should be considered a reliable management option, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Mavrogenis AF, Igoumenou VG, Megaloikonomos PD, Panagopoulos GN, Papagelopoulos PJ, Soucacos PN. Giant cell tumor of bone revisited. SICOT-J. 2017;3:54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2017041

Purohit S, Pardiwala DN. Imaging of giant cell tumor of bone. Indian J Orthop. 2007;41(2):91–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.32037

Turcotte RE. Giant cell tumor of bone. Orthoped Clin North America. 2006;37(1):35–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2005.08.005

Neonakis E, Antoniou G, Triantafyllopoulos IK. Malignant giant cell tumor of bone. JRPMS. 2019;03(3):83–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22540/JRPMS-03-083

Saxena CC, Safaya R, Madan NK, Khan SA, Iyer VK. Histopathological, immunohistochemical and image analytic parameters characterizing the stromal component in primary and recurrent giant cell tumor of bone. J Clin Orthopaed & Trauma. 2016;7(2):109–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2015.09.006

Georgiev GP, Landzhov B, Slavchev SA, Rashev P, Todorov T, Malinova L, et al. Comparative electron microscopic and immunohistochemical study of stromal cells in giant cell tumor of bone. Scripta Scientifica Medica. 2013;45(0):19–22.

Billy J, Boudabbous S, Hannouche D, Zingg M. Giant cell tumor of bone. Rev Med Suisse. 2021;17(763):2187–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53738/REVMED.2021.17.763.2187

Mohaidat ZM, Al-jamal HZ, Bany-Khalaf AM, Radaideh AM, Audat ZA. Giant cell tumor of bone: Unusual features of a rare tumor. Rare Tumors. 2019;11:2036361319878894. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2036361319878894

Ataei R, Khooei A, Gharedaghi M. Prediction of clinical course and biologic behavior of the bone giant cell tumor using bax and bcl-2 Markers. Iranian J Pathol. 2010;5(2):53–9.

He H, Zeng H, Luo W, Liu Y, Zhang C, Liu Q. Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumors of Bone Around the Knee Joint: Extended Curettage or Segmental Resection. Front Oncol. 2019;9:946. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00946

Machak GN, Snetkov AI. The impact of curettage technique on local control in giant cell tumour of bone. Internat Orthopaed. 2021;45(3):779–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04860-y

Gambini A, Di Giorgio L, Valeo M, Trinchi R, Marzolini M, Mastantuono M. Giant cell tumor of bone: effect ofdifferent surgical techniques and adjuvants on local recurrencerate. J Orthopaed Traumatol. 2003;4(3):126–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-003-0024-3

Pietschmann MF, Dietz RA, Utzschneider S, Baur-Melnyk A, Jansson V, Dürr HR. The influence of adjuvants on local recurrence rate in giant cell tumour of the bone. Acta Chirurgica Belgica. 2010;110(6):584–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00015458.2010.11680682

Leng A, Gao H, Li J, Meng L, Wang Q, Xiang L. Intralesional curettage and surgical adjuvants in the treatment of giant cell tumor of bone: meta-analysis and systematic review. Chin Clin Oncol. 2024;13(2):20–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/cco-23-138

Zhen W, Yaotian H, Songjian L, Ge L, Qingliang W. Giant-cell tumour of bone: the long-term results of treatment by curettage and bone graft. J Bone Joint Surg British Vol. 2004;86(2):212–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86B2.14362

Zuo D, Zheng L, Sun W, Fu D, Hua Y, Cai Z. Contemporary adjuvant polymethyl methacrylate cementation optimally limits recurrence in primary giant cell tumor of bone patients compared to bone grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11(1):156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-11-156

Ward WGS, Li GI. Customized treatment algorithm for giant cell tumor of bone: report of a series. Clin Orthopaed Related Res. 2002;397:259. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200204000-00030

Seth I, Bulloch G, Lim B, Xie Y, Seth N, Rozen WM, et al. Evaluating Extended Curettage and Adjuvant Therapy Against Wide Resection and Reconstruction in the Management of Distal Radius Giant Cell Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Hand (New York). 2024;23:1558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447241245736

Takeuchi A, Tsuchiya H, Ishii T, Nishida Y, Abe S, Matsumine A, et al. Clinical outcome of recurrent giant cell tumor of the extremity in the era before molecular target therapy: the Japanese musculoskeletal oncology group study. BMC Musc Disord. 2016;17(1):306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1163-z

Xiang F, Liu H, Deng J, Ma W, Chen Y. Progress on denosumab use in giant cell tumor of bone: dose and duration of therapy. Cancers. 2022;14(23):5758. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14235758

Ferguson PC. CORR Insights®: is a short-course of preoperative denosumab as effective as prolonged therapy for giant cell tumor of bone. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478(11):2534-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000001412

Wang H, Wan N, Hu Y. Giant cell tumour of bone: a new evaluating system is necessary. Int Orthopaed. 2012;36(12):2521-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1664-9

Rizzo A, Paderno M, Saccomanno MF, Milano F, Milano G. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scoring system is a valid subjective and objective tool to evaluate outcomes of surgical treatment of patients affected by upper and lower extremity tumors. Musculoskelet Surg. 2024;108(2):201-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-024-00815-3

Pandey S. Clinical outcome of operative treatment in 18 cases of giant cell tumors of bones. J Chitwan Med Coll. 2020;10(2):67-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54530/jcmc.156

Şirin E, Akgülle AH, Topkar OM, Sofulu Ö, Baykan SE, Erol B. Mid-term results of intralesional extended curettage, cauterization and polymethylmethacrylate cementation in the treatment of giant cell tumor of bone: A retrospective case series. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2020;54(5):524-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2020.19082

Jamshidi K, Sharifi Dalooei SMA, Bagherifard A, Mirzaei A. Total synovectomy and bone grafting/cementation after curettage of the bone lesion in diffuse‏ type ‏of tenosynovial‏ giant cell tumor‎: a retrospective cohort study. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2023;11(5):342-7.

Carolino DKD, Abigail R. Tud MM. Functional outcomes of limb salvage surgery in patients with giant cell tumor of bone of the lower extremities: a cross-sectional comparative study. Acta Medica Philippina. 2024;58(14):89-94.

Yenigül AE, Sofulu Ö, Erol B. Treatment of locally aggressive benign bone tumors by means of extended intralesional curettage without chemical adjuvants. SAGE Open Med. 2022;10:205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20503121221094199

Algarf A, Hasan B, Badr I. Functional and oncological outcomes after extended curettage of giant cell tumor around the knee. Menoufia Med J. 2022;35(3):1549-54.

Kundu ZS, Gupta V, Sangwan SS, Rana P. Curettage of benign bone tumors and tumor like lesions: A retrospective analysis. Indian J Orthop. 2013;47(3):295-301. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.111507