Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess whether the use of a joint-sparing technique such as curettage and grafting was successful in eradicating giant cell tumours of the proximal femur, or whether an alternative strategy was more appropriate.
Between 1974 and 2012, 24 patients with a giant cell tumour of the proximal femur were treated primarily at our hospital. Treatment was either joint sparing or joint replacing. Joint-sparing treatment was undertaken in ten patients by curettage with or without adjunctive bone graft. Joint replacement was by total hip replacement in nine patients and endoprosthetic replacement in five. All 11 patients who presented with a pathological fracture were treated by replacement.
Local recurrence occurred in five patients (21%): two were treated by hip replacement, three by curettage and none with an endoprosthesis. Of the ten patients treated initially by curettage, six had a successful outcome without local recurrence and required no further surgery. Three eventually needed a hip replacement for local recurrence and one an endoprosthetic replacement for mechanical failure. Thus 18 patients had the affected joint replaced and only six (25%) retained their native joint. Overall, 60% of patients without a pathological fracture who were treated with curettage had a successful outcome.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:127–31.
