Giant cell tumours (GCT) of the synovium and tendon sheath can be classified into two forms: localised (giant cell tumour of the tendon sheath, or nodular tenosynovitis) and diffuse (diffuse-type giant cell tumour or pigmented villonodular synovitis). The former principally affects the small joints. It presents as a solitary slow-growing tumour with a characteristic appearance on MRI and is treated by surgical excision. There is a significant risk of multiple recurrences with aggressive diffuse disease. A multidisciplinary approach with dedicated MRI, histological assessment and planned surgery with either adjuvant radiotherapy or systemic targeted therapy is required to improve outcomes in recurrent and refractory diffuse-type GCT.

Although arthroscopic synovectomy through several portals has been advocated as an alternative to arthrotomy, there is a significant risk of inadequate excision and recurrence, particularly in the posterior compartment of the knee. For local disease partial arthroscopic synovectomy may be sufficient, at the risk of recurrence. For both local and diffuse intra-articular disease open surgery is advised for recurrent disease. Marginal excision with focal disease will suffice, not dissimilar to the treatment of GCT of tendon sheath. For recurrent and extra-articular soft-tissue disease adjuvant therapy, including intra-articular radioactive colloid or moderate-dose external beam radiotherapy, should be considered.

Aims

Tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) is one of the most common soft-tissue tumours of the foot and ankle and can behave in a locally aggressive manner. Tumour control can be difficult, despite the various methods of treatment available. Since treatment guidelines are lacking, the aim of this study was to review the multidisciplinary management by presenting the largest series of TGCT of the foot and ankle to date from two specialized sarcoma centres.

Patients who have limb amputation for musculoskeletal tumours are a rare group of cancer survivors. This was a prospective cross-sectional survey of patients from five specialist centres for sarcoma surgery in England. Physical function, pain and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were collected after lower extremity amputation for bone or soft-tissue tumours to evaluate the survivorship experience and inform service provision.

Of 250 patients, 105 (42%) responded between September 2012 and June 2013. From these, completed questionnaires were received from 100 patients with a mean age of 53.6 years (19 to 91). In total 60 (62%) were male and 37 (38%) were female (three not specified). The diagnosis was primary bone sarcoma in 63 and soft-tissue tumour in 37. A total of 20 tumours were located in the hip or pelvis, 31 above the knee, 32 between the knee and ankle and 17 in the ankle or foot. In total 22 had hemipelvectomy, nine hip disarticulation, 35 transfemoral amputation, one knee disarticulation, 30 transtibial amputation, two toe amputations and one rotationplasty. The Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) differed by amputation level, with poorer scores at higher levels (p < 0.001). Many reported significant pain. In addition, TESS was negatively associated with increasing age, and pain interference scores. QOL for Cancer Survivors was significantly correlated with TESS (p < 0.001). This relationship appeared driven by pain interference scores.

This unprecedented national survey confirms amputation level is linked to physical function, but not QOL or pain measures. Pain and physical function significantly impact on QOL. These results are helpful in managing the expectations of patients about treatment and addressing their complex needs.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1284–90.