Aims. A single-centre prospective randomized trial was conducted to investigate whether a less intensive follow-up protocol would not be inferior to a conventional follow-up protocol, in terms of overall survival, in patients who have undergone surgery for sarcoma of the limb. Initial short-term results were published in 2014. Patients and Methods. The primary objective was to show non-inferiority of a chest radiograph (CXR) group compared with a CT scan group, and of a less frequent (six-monthly) group than a more frequent (three-monthly) group, in two-by-two comparison. The primary outcome was overall survival and the secondary outcome was a recurrence-free survival. Five-year survival was compared between the CXR and CT scan groups and between the three-monthly and six-monthly groups. Of 500 patients who were enrolled, 476 were available for follow-up. Survival analyses were performed on a per-protocol basis (n = 412). Results. The updated results recorded 12 (2.4%) local recurrences, 182 (36.8%) metastases, and 56 (11.3%) combined (local + metastases) recurrence at a median follow-up of 81 months (60 to 118). Of 68 local recurrences, 60 (88%) were identified by the patients themselves. The six-monthly regime (overall survival (OS) 54%, recurrence-free survival (RFS) 46%) did not lead to a worse survival and was not inferior to the three-monthly regime (OS 55%, RFS 47%) in terms of detecting recurrence. Although CT scans (OS 53%, RFS 54%) detected pulmonary metastasis earlier, it did not lead to a better survival compared with CXR (OS 56%, RFS 59%). Conclusion. The overall survival of patients who are treated for a sarcoma of the limb is not inferior to those followed up with a less intensive regimen than a more intensive protocol, in terms of frequency of visits and mode of imaging. CXR at six-monthly intervals and patient education about examination of the site of the surgery will detect most recurrences without deleterious effects on the eventual outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:262–8

Objectives. The diagnosis of surgical site infection following endoprosthetic reconstruction for bone tumours is frequently a subjective diagnosis. Large clinical trials use blinded Central Adjudication Committees (CACs) to minimise the variability and bias associated with assessing a clinical outcome. The aim of this study was to determine the level of inter-rater and intra-rater agreement in the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial. Materials and Methods. The Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial CAC adjudicated 29 non-PARITY cases of lower extremity endoprosthetic reconstruction. The CAC members classified each case according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) criteria for surgical site infection (superficial, deep, or organ space). Combinatorial analysis was used to calculate the smallest CAC panel size required to maximise agreement. A final meeting was held to establish a consensus. Results. Full or near consensus was reached in 20 of the 29 cases. The Fleiss kappa value was calculated as 0.44 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 0.53), or moderate agreement. The greatest statistical agreement was observed in the outcome of no infection, 0.61 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.72, substantial agreement). Panelists reached a full consensus in 12 of 29 cases and near consensus in five of 29 cases when CDC criteria were used (superficial, deep or organ space). A stable maximum Fleiss kappa of 0.46 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.35) at CAC sizes greater than three members was obtained. Conclusions. There is substantial agreement among the members of the PARITY CAC regarding the presence or absence of surgical site infection. Agreement on the level of infection, however, is more challenging. Additional clinical information routinely collected by the prospective PARITY trial may improve the discriminatory capacity of the CAC in the parent study for the diagnosis of infection. Cite this article: J. Nuttall, N. Evaniew, P. Thornley, A. Griffin, B. Deheshi, T. O’Shea, J. Wunder, P. Ferguson, R. L. Randall, R. Turcotte, P. Schneider, P. McKay, M. Bhandari, M. Ghert. The inter-rater reliability of the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:347–352. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.58.BJR-2016-0036.R1

Aims

Local recurrence remains a challenging and common problem following curettage and joint-sparing surgery for giant cell tumour of bone (GCTB). We previously reported a 15% local recurrence rate at a median follow-up of 30 months in 20 patients with high-risk GCTB treated with neoadjuvant Denosumab. The aim of this study was to determine if this initial favourable outcome following the use of Denosumab was maintained with longer follow-up.

Aims

The existing clinical guidelines do not describe a clear indication for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in the treatment of superficial soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). We aimed to determine the efficacy of adjuvant RT for superficial STSs.

Objectives

In this cross sectional study, the impact and the efficacy of a surveillance programme for sarcomas of the extremities was analysed.

Objectives

As tumours of bone and soft tissue are rare, multicentre prospective collaboration is essential for meaningful research and evidence-based advances in patient care. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in large-scale collaborative research by orthopaedic oncological surgeons involved or interested in prospective multicentre collaboration.