Sixty eight consecutive patients underwent proximal humeral replacement with a fixed fulcrum massive endoprosthesis, for tumour, between 1997 and 2007. The mean age was 46 years, (7–87). Ten patients were lost to follow up and 16 patients died. The 42 surviving patients were assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) Score and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS). The mean MSTS score was 72.3% and the mean TESS was 77.2%.

Four of 42 patients received a new constrained humeral liner to reduce the risk of dislocation. This sub group of 4 patients had a mean MSTS score of 77.7% and a mean TESS of 80.0%.

Endoprosthetic replacement for tumour of the proximal humerus using this prosthesis is a reliable operation yielding good functional results without the documented problems of unconstrained prostheses. The performance of this prosthesis is expected to improve further with the new constrained humeral liner.

Percutaneous biopsies can lead to seeding of tumour cells along the biopsy tract.

Correct surgical management requires preoperative identification and excision of the biopsy tract at time of surgery. These tracts become increasingly difficult to identify with time, leading to risk of inadequate excision of the biopsy tract and recurrence of the tumour at the biopsy site. We conducted a prospective study involving 45 patients who had tissue biopsies for bone and soft tissue tumours between February and May 2008. All the biopsies were performed by consultant radiologist under ultrasound or CT guidance. Case note analysis, patient history and examination at the time of surgery were used to collect data. 23 of 45 patients had accurate identification of the biopsy tract by the surgeon at the time of excision. The mean time between biopsy and excision was 52 days (range 6–140). 22 of 45 patients had unidentifiable biopsy site, with the mean time between biopsy and excision being 98 days(range 13–164) p=0.0004(paired t test). All 4 patients who received post-biopsy radiotherapy had unidentifiable biopsy site tract (mean duration 104 days) and 11 of the 18 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy had an unidentifiable biopsy tract (mean duration 108 days). We concluded that identification of biopsy site was more difficult after 50 days, especially in patients who underwent radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Following this study, all the patients who had biopsies of tumours had the site marked with India ink tattoo. We, then prospectively reviewed 36 patients between July and September 2010 who underwent excision of bone and soft tissue tumours and had their biopsy sites marked with India ink tattoo. After needle biopsy, one drop of the dye was applied at the site of the biopsy. This was taken up by capillary action beneath the dermis and remained present until the patient returned for their definitive surgery. The biopsy site was easily identifiable by the patients and the operating surgeon in all 36 patients. The mean time between biopsy and surgery was 77 days (range 10–299 days). Tattooing of the skin enabled the surgeon to accurately excise the biopsy tract along with the tumour. We recommend this technique of tattooing of the biopsy site with India ink, as it is safe, easily recognisable and permits accurate excision of the tract (including the tattoo), therefore preventing biopsy tract recurrence.