Aims

Osteosarcoma of the pelvis is a particularly difficult tumour to treat as it often presents late, may be of considerable size and/or associated with metastases when it presents, and is frequently chondroid in origin and resistant to chemotherapy.

The aim of this study was to review our experience of managing this group of patients and to identify features predictive of a poor outcome.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic and therapeutic factors which influence the oncological outcome of parosteal osteosarcoma.

A total of 80 patients with a primary parosteal osteosarcoma were included in this retrospective study. There were 51 females and 29 males with a mean age of 29.9 years (11 to 78).

The mean follow-up was 11.2 years (1 to 40). Overall survival was 91.8% at five years and 87.8% at ten years. Local recurrence occurred in 14 (17.5%) patients and was associated with intralesional surgery and a large volume of tumour. On histological examination, 80% of the local recurrences were dedifferentiated high-grade tumours. A total of 12 (14.8%) patients developed pulmonary metastases, of whom half had either a dedifferentiated tumour or a local recurrence. Female gender and young age were good prognostic factors. Local recurrence was a poor prognostic factor for survival. Medullary involvement or the use of chemotherapy had no impact on survival.

The main goal in treating a parosteal osteosarcoma must be to achieve a wide surgical margin, as inadequate margins are associated with local recurrence. Local recurrence has a significant negative effect on survival, as 80% of the local recurrences are high-grade dedifferentiated tumours, and half of these patients develop metastases.

The role of chemotherapy in the treatment of parosteal osteosarcoma is not as obvious as it is in the treatment of conventional osteosarcoma. The mainstay of treatment is wide local excision.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1698–1703.

Bone sarcomas are rare cancers and orthopaedic surgeons come across them infrequently, sometimes unexpectedly during surgical procedures. We investigated the outcomes of patients who underwent a surgical procedure where sarcomas were found unexpectedly and were subsequently referred to our unit for treatment. We identified 95 patients (44 intra-lesional excisions, 35 fracture fixations, 16 joint replacements) with mean age of 48 years (11 to 83); 60% were males (n = 57). Local recurrence arose in 40% who underwent limb salvage surgery versus 12% who had an amputation. Despite achieving local control, overall survival was worse for patients treated with amputation rather than limb salvage (54% vs 75% five-year survival). Factors that negatively influenced survival were invasive primary surgery (fracture fixation, joint replacement), a delay of greater than two months until referral to our oncology service, and high-grade tumours. Survival in these circumstances depends mostly on factors that are determined prior to definitive treatment by a tertiary orthopaedic oncology unit. Limb salvage in this group of patients is associated with a higher rate of inadequate marginal surgery and, consequently, higher local recurrence rates than amputation, but should still be attempted whenever possible, as local control is not the primary determinant of survival.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:665–72.

We treated 98 patients with peri-acetabular tumours by resection and reconstruction with a custom-made pelvic endoprosthesis. The overall survival of the patients was 67% at five years, 54% at ten years and 51% at 30 years. One or more complications occurred in 58.1% of patients (54), of which infection was the most common, affecting 30% (28 patients). The rate of local recurrence was 31% (29 patients) after a mean follow-up of 71 months (11 to 147). Dislocation occurred in 20% of patients (19). Before 1996 the rate was 40.5% (17 patients) but this was reduced to 3.9% (two patients) with the introduction of a larger femoral head. There were six cases of palsy of the femoral nerve with recovery in only two. Revision or excision arthroplasty was performed in 23.7% of patients (22), principally for uncontrolled infection or aseptic loosening. Higher rates of death, infection and revision occurred in men.

This method of treatment is still associated with high morbidity. Patients should be carefully selected and informed of this pre-operatively.

Peri- and sub-prosthetic fractures, or pathological fractures below an existing well-fixed femoral component, with or without an ipsilateral knee replacement, present a difficult surgical challenge.

We describe a simple solution, in which a custom-made prosthesis with a cylindrical design is cemented proximally to the stem of an existing, well-fixed femoral component. This effectively treats the fracture without sacrificing the good hip. We describe five patients with a mean age of 73 years (60 to 81) and a mean follow-up of 47 months (6 to 108).

The mean overlap of the prosthesis over the femoral component was 7.5 cm (5.5 to 10). There have been no mechanical failures, no new infections and no re-operations. We suggest that in highly selected cases, in which conventional fixation is not feasible, this technique offers a durable option and avoids the morbidity of a total femoral replacement.

Before proceeding to longer-term studies, we have studied the early clinical results of a new mobile-bearing total knee prosthesis in comparison with an established fixed-bearing device. Patients requiring bilateral knee replacement consented to have their operations under one anaesthetic using one of each prosthesis. They also agreed to accept the random choice of knee (right or left) and to remain ignorant as to which side had which implant. Outcomes were measured using the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and determination of the range of movement and pain scores before and at one year after operation.

Preoperatively, there was no systematic difference between the right and left knees. One patient died in the perioperative period and one mobile-bearing prosthesis required early revision for dislocation of the meniscal component.

At one year the mean AKSS, OKS and pain scores for the new device were slightly better (p < 0.025) than those for the fixed-bearing device. There was no difference in the range of movement.

We believe that this is the first controlled, blinded trial to compare early function of a new knee prosthesis with that of a standard implant. It demonstrates a small but significant clinical advantage for the mobile-bearing design.