Abstract
Aim: The differential diagnosis between chondroma and grade I chondrosarcoma still represents a challenge. There are always cases in which a perfect diagnosis can’t be done for sure. This cases are defined in literature with different synonyms such as: borderline chondrosarcoma, grade 0 chondrosarcoma, atypical enchondroma or in situ chondrosarcoma. Enchondroma are benign lesions that do not require a surgical treatment. Low grade chondrosarcoma is a malignant tumour that can recur and also if in a low percentage of cases can metastasize. Methods: The Authors reviewed 22 cases of chondrosarcoma of the limbs for clinical, radiographycal and histological features. Results: Pain was present in 80% of cases of low grade chondrosarcoma, while was absent in enchondroma. Radiographic analysis was not significative. Bone scan was often positive in low grade chondrosarcoma as in enchondroma. Histology demonstrated a permeative pattern in chondrosarcoma with infiltration of the bone trabeculae. Conclusions: Only the complete evaluation of the patient resulted in a correct diagnosis. Follow-up of patients confirmed our findings
Theses abstracts were prepared by Professor Dr. Frantz Langlais. Correspondence should be addressed to him at EFORT Central Office, Freihofstrasse 22, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerland.
