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. Methods. All surgeons who were involved, or had expressed an interest, in the ongoing Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial were invited to participate in a focus group to discuss their experiences with collaborative research in this area. The discussion was digitally recorded, transcribed and anonymised. The transcript was analysed qualitatively, using an analytic approach which aims to organise the data in the language of the participants with little theoretical interpretation. Results. The 13 surgeons who participated in the discussion represented orthopaedic oncology practices from seven countries (Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Denmark, United States and Canada). Four categories and associated themes emerged from the discussion: the need for collaboration in the field of orthopaedic oncology due to the rarity of the tumours and the need for high level evidence to guide treatment; motivational factors for participating in collaborative research including establishing proof of principle, learning opportunity, answering a relevant research question and being part of a collaborative research community; barriers to participation including funding, personal barriers, institutional barriers, trial barriers, and administrative barriers and facilitators for participation including institutional facilitators, leadership, authorship, trial set-up, and the support of centralised study coordination. Conclusions. Orthopaedic surgeons involved in an ongoing international randomised controlled trial (RCT) were motivated by many factors to participate. There were a number of barriers to and facilitators for their participation. There was a collective sense of fatigue experienced in overcoming these barriers, which was mirrored by a strong collective sense of the importance of, and need for, collaborative research in this field. The experiences were described as essential educational first steps to advance collaborative studies in this area. Knowledge gained from this study will inform the development of future large-scale collaborative research projects in orthopaedic oncology. Cite this article: J. S. Rendon, M. Swinton, N. Bernthal, M. Boffano, T. Damron, N. Evaniew, P. Ferguson, M. Galli Serra, W. Hettwer, P. McKay, B. Miller, L. Nystrom, W. Parizzia, P. Schneider, A. Spiguel, R. Vélez, K. Weiss, J. P. Zumárraga, M. Ghert. Barriers and facilitators experienced in collaborative prospective research in orthopaedic oncology: A qualitative study. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:–314. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.65.BJR-2016-0192.R1

Objective. Clinical studies of patients with bone sarcomas have been challenged by insufficient numbers at individual centres to draw valid conclusions. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of conducting a definitive multi-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine whether a five-day regimen of post-operative antibiotics, in comparison to a 24-hour regimen, decreases surgical site infections in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for lower extremity primary bone tumours. . Methods. We performed a pilot international multi-centre RCT. We used central randomisation to conceal treatment allocation and sham antibiotics to blind participants, surgeons, and data collectors. We determined feasibility by measuring patient enrolment, completeness of follow-up, and protocol deviations for the antibiotic regimens. . Results. We screened 96 patients and enrolled 60 participants (44 men and 16 women) across 21 sites from four countries over 24 months (mean 2.13 participants per site per year, standard deviation 2.14). One participant was lost to follow-up and one withdrew consent. Complete data were obtained for 98% of eligible patients at two weeks, 83% at six months, and 73% at one year (the remainder with partial data or pending queries). In total, 18 participants missed at least one dose of antibiotics or placebo post-operatively, but 93% of all post-operative doses were administered per protocol. . Conclusions. It is feasible to conduct a definitive multi-centre RCT of post-operative antibiotic regimens in patients with bone sarcomas, but further expansion of our collaborative network will be critical. We have demonstrated an ability to coordinate in multiple countries, enrol participants, maintain protocol adherence, and minimise losses to follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res;4:154–162

Objectives

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

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.

Excision of the proximal femur for tumour with prosthetic reconstruction using a bipolar femoral head places a considerable load on the unreplaced acetabulum.

We retrospectively reviewed the changes which occur around the affected hip joint by evaluating the post-operative radiographs of 65 consecutive patients who underwent proximal prosthetic arthroplasty of the femur, and in whom an acetabular component had not been used. There were 37 men and 28 women with a mean age of 57.3 years (17 to 93). Radiological assessment included the extent of degenerative change in the acetabulum, heterotopic ossification, and protrusio acetabuli.

The mean follow-up was 9.1 years (2 to 11.8). Degenerative changes in the acetabulum were seen in three patients (4.6%), Brooker grade 1 or 2 heterotopic ossification in 17 (26%) and protrusion of the prosthetic head in nine (13.8%).

A total of eight patients (12.3%) needed a revision. Five were revised to the same type of prosthesis and three (4.6%) were converted to a total hip arthroplasty.

We conclude that radiological evidence of degenerative change, heterotopic ossification and protrusion occur in a few patients who undergo prosthetic arthroplasty of the proximal femur for tumour. The limited extent of these changes and the lack of associated symptoms do not justify the routine arthroplasty of the acetabulum in these patients.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1704–9

We investigated whether the presence of a pathological fracture increased the risk of local recurrence in patients with a giant cell tumour (GCT) of bone. We also assessed if curettage is still an appropriate form of treatment in the presence of a pathological fracture. We conducted a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of papers which reported outcomes in patients with a GCT with and without a pathological fracture at presentation. We computed the odds ratio (OR) of local recurrence in those with and without a pathological fracture.

We selected 19 eligible papers for final analysis. This included 3215 patients, of whom 580 (18.0%) had a pathological fracture. The pooled OR for local recurrence between patients with and without a pathological fracture was 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.67, p = 0.854). Amongst the subgroup of patients who were treated with curettage, the pooled OR for local recurrence was 1.23 (95% CI 0.75 to 2.01, p = 0.417).

A post hoc sample size calculation showed adequate power for both comparisons.

There is no difference in local recurrence rates between patients who have a GCT of bone with and without a pathological fracture at the time of presentation. The presence of a pathological fracture should not preclude the decision to perform curettage as carefully selected patients who undergo curettage can have similar outcomes in terms of local recurrence to those without such a fracture.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1566–71.

We conducted a case-control study to examine the merit of silver-coated tumour prostheses. We reviewed 85 patients with Agluna-treated (silver-coated) tumour implants treated between 2006 and 2011 and matched them with 85 control patients treated between 2001 and 2011 with identical, but uncoated, tumour prostheses.

In all, 106 men and 64 women with a mean age of 42.2 years (18.4 to 90.4) were included in the study. There were 50 primary reconstructions (29.4%); 79 one-stage revisions (46.5%) and 41 two-stage revisions for infection (24.1%).

The overall post-operative infection rate of the silver-coated group was 11.8% compared with 22.4% for the control group (p = 0.033, chi-square test). A total of seven of the ten infected prostheses in the silver-coated group were treated successfully with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention compared with only six of the 19 patients (31.6%) in the control group (p = 0.048, chi-square test). Three patients in the silver-coated group (3.5%) and 13 controls (15.3%) had chronic periprosthetic infection (p = 0.009, chi-square test).

The overall success rates in controlling infection by two-stage revision in the silver-coated group was 85% (17/20) compared with 57.1% (12/21) in the control group (p = 0.05, chi-square test). The Agluna-treated endoprostheses were associated with a lower rate of early periprosthetic infection. These silver-treated implants were particularly useful in two-stage revisions for infection and in those patients with incidental positive cultures at the time of implantation of the prosthesis.

Debridement with antibiotic treatment and retention of the implant appeared to be more successful with silver-coated implants.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:252–7.

Between 1966 and 2001, 1254 patients underwent excision of a bone tumour with endoprosthetic replacement. All patients who had radiotherapy were identified. Their clinical details were retrieved from their records.

A total of 63 patients (5%) had received adjunctive radiotherapy, 29 pre-operatively and 34 post-operatively. The mean post-operative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores of irradiated patients were significantly lower (log-rank test, p = 0.009). The infection rate in the group who had not been irradiated was 9.8% (117 of 1191), compared with 20.7% (6 of 29) in those who had pre-operative radiotherapy and 35.3% (12 of 34) in those who radiotherapy post-operatively. The infection-free survival rate at ten years was 85.5% for patients without radiotherapy, 74.1% for those who had pre-operative radiotherapy and 44.8% for those who had post-operative radiotherapy (log-rank test, p < 0.001). The ten-year limb salvage rate was 89% for those who did not have radiotherapy and 76% for those who did (log-rank test, p = 0.02).

Radiotherapy increased the risk of revision (log-rank test, p = 0.015). A total of ten amputations were necessary to control infection, of which nine were successful. Radiotherapy may be necessary for the treatment of a bone sarcoma but increases the risk of deep infection for which amputation may be the only solution.

Open surgery is rarely justified for the initial treatment of a unicameral bone cyst, but there is some debate concerning the relative effectiveness of closed methods. This study compared the results of steroid injection with those of autologous bone marrow grafting for the treatment of unicameral bone cysts. Between 1990 and 2001, 30 patients were treated by steroid injection and 28 by grafting with autologous bone marrow. The overall success rates were 86.7% and 92.0%, respectively (p > 0.05). The success rate after the initial procedure was 23.3% in the steroid group and 52.0% in those receiving autologous bone marrow (p < 0.05), and the respective cumulative success rates after second injections were 63.3% and 80.0% (p > 0.05). The mean number of procedures required was 2.19 (1 to 5) and 1.57 (1 to 3) (p < 0.05), the mean interval to healing was 12.5 months (4 to 32) and 14.3 months (7 to 36) (p > 0.05), and the rate of recurrence after the initial procedure was 41.7% and 13.3% in the steroid and in the autologous bone marrow groups, respectively (p < 0.05).

Although the overall rates of success of both methods were similar, the steroid group had higher recurrence after a single procedure and required more injections to achieve healing.

We identified 42 patients who presented to our unit over a 27-year period with a secondary radiation-induced sarcoma of bone. We reviewed patient, tumour and treatment factors to identify those that affected outcome. The mean age of the patients at presentation was 45.6 years (10 to 84) and the mean latent interval between radiotherapy and diagnosis of the sarcoma was 17 years (4 to 50). The median dose of radiotherapy given was estimated at 50 Gy (mean 49; 20 to 66). There was no correlation between radiation dose and the time to development of a sarcoma. The pelvis was the most commonly affected site (14 patients (33%)). Breast cancer was the most common primary tumour (eight patients; 19%). Metastases were present at diagnosis of the sarcoma in nine patients (21.4%). Osteosarcoma was the most common diagnosis and occurred in 30 cases (71.4%). Treatment was by surgery and chemotherapy when indicated: 30 patients (71.4%) were treated with the intention to cure. The survival rate was 41% at five years for those treated with the intention to cure but in those treated palliatively the mean survival was only 8.8 months (2 to 22), and all had died by two years. The only factor found to be significant for survival was the ability to completely resect the tumour. Limb sarcomas had a better prognosis (66% survival at five years) than central ones (12% survival at five years) (p = 0.009).

Radiation-induced sarcoma is a rare complication of radiotherapy. Both surgical and oncological treatment is likely to be compromised by the treatment received previously by the patient.