The undergraduate curricula in the UK have no designated modules on sarcomas. Lumps and bumps are commonly presented to surgeons, hence awareness of sarcoma is important.

The aim of this study was to identify the awareness and knowledge of orthopaedic and surgical trainees relating to the presentation, referral and management of sarcomas.

Participants were invited to take part and complete an online questionnaire. Sarcoma knowledge was assessed using a variety of questions. Key resources were provided to improve knowledge at the end of the questionnaire.

There were 250 respondents, which included medical students (n=49), foundation doctors (n=37), core surgical trainees (n=58), registrars (n=73), post-CCT surgeons (n=9) and academic fellows (n=4). Both UK and international trainees were included. 45% did not recall receiving sarcoma teaching at undergraduate level, with 61% stating they did not have adequate training to identify sarcoma “red flags”. 58% did not have sufficient background knowledge of sarcomas whilst 38% were unable to identify sarcoma red flags. 64% and 25% of trainees had insufficient knowledge of the correct referral process and management for sarcomas respectively.

There appears to be a deficiency in training regarding sarcoma identification and management within trainees. “Red flags” for lumps are not widely known who may be asked to review these patients. Many trainees are not aware of the national guidelines for referral and management. The large sample of respondents is likely to be representative of the larger trend and may lead to inappropriate management, poor outcomes and litigation.

Aim

The aim of this study was to review the referral pattern of Soft Tissue Sarcoma (STS) in the Mersey region. We were interested in the referrals that came from other specialties [not primary care] and how they were managed before being finally referred on to the Tumour Unit.

The outcome for patients with Ewing's sarcoma recurrence is poor. Local recurrences occur in 8%-25%of these patients. The aim of the study was to analyze the patients who had a local recurrence to identify factors predicting the local recurrence and if it could be prevented

Introduction: The aim of this study was to identify the pattern of symptoms in patients presenting with synovial sarcoma, examine how these corresponded to the symptoms outlined by the NICE guidelines on the rapid referral of patients with a suspected sarcoma and spot factors that led to long delays in diagnosis.

Methods: Early symptoms and the results of clinical and radiological investigation were reviewed along with the presumed diagnoses that had been made for 35 children. The total duration of symptoms was separated into patient delay and doctor delay.

Results: Using the four clinical findings suggestive of sarcoma according to the NICE guidance, only half of the patients had one or more of them at the time of initial symptoms. The most common presentation was a painless mass (n=16), and in 10 children there was no mass identified. Seven patients had an inexplicable joint contracture, many having been extensively investigated unsuccessfully. The mean duration of symptoms before the diagnosis was made was 98 weeks (range 2 to 364). The mean number of doctors seen prior to referral was 3 (range 1–6) and for 15 patients the diagnosis was obtained after inadvertent excision. The factors associated with long duration of symptoms before diagnosis were knee and elbow location (p=0.0047) or periarticular location (p=0.01), absence of lump (p=0.016) or painful mass as early symptom (p=0.04), the presence of calcifications on x-rays (p=0.01) and a fixed joint contracture (p=0.0003).

We could not show that delay in diagnosis led to a worse prognosis.

Discussion: This paper highlights the sometimes bizarre symptoms associated with synovial sarcoma and hopefully this will increase awareness of the condition among relevant sections of the medical profession and help to reduce the delay in diagnosing these cases.

Introduction: Modular tumour prosthetic replacement is especially useful in the region of proximal femur following pathological fractures and failed fixation. The aim of the study was to assess the clinical and functional outcomes following modular tumour prosthesis reconstruction of the proximal femur in 100 consecutive patients with metastatic tumours and to assess its cost effectiveness.

Methods: The study was a retrospective review of 100 consecutive patients who underwent modular tumour prosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur using the METS prosthesis [Stanmore Implants Worldwide] for metastatic tumours from 2001 to 2008.

Results and conclusion: There were 45 male and 55 female patients. The mean age was 60.2 years. The indications were metastasis [23renal ca, 28 breast ca, 11 ca bronchus, 5 ca prostate and 31 others]. 75 patients presented with pathological fracture or with failed fixation and 25 patients were at a high risk of developing fracture. The mean follow up was 24.6 months [range0–74]. Three patients died within 2 weeks following surgery. Of the 60 patients who were dead 58 did not need revision surgery indicating that the implant provided single definitive treatment which outlived the patient. 1 patient had revision surgery. There were 2 dislocations. 6 patients had deep infections. The implant survival was 98% with revision or amputation as end point. The hospital cost of an endoprosthetic replacement is estimated to be £12,000. This procedure becomes cost effective when compared with no treatment if the patients’ life expectancy is more than 40 days and when compared with internal fixation if the patients’ life expectancy is more than 2 years.

We conclude that METS modular tumour prosthesis for proximal femur provides versatility; low implant related complications and acceptable function lasting the lifetime of the patients with metastatic tumours of the proximal femur providing a cost effective solution.