Aims. The Birmingham Orthopaedic Oncology Meeting (BOOM), held in January 2024, convened 309 delegates from 53 countries to discuss and refine 21 consensus statements on the optimal management of chondrosarcoma. Methods. With representation from Europe (43%; n = 133), North America (17%; n = 53), South America (16%; n = 49), Asia (13%; n = 40), Australasia (5%; n = 16), the Middle East (4%; n = 12), and Africa (2%; n = 6), the combined experience of treating bone sarcomas among attendees totalled approximately 30,000 cases annually, equivalent to 66 years of experience in the UK alone. The meeting’s process began with the formation of a local organizing committee, regional leads, and a scientific committee comprising representatives from 150 specialist units across 47 countries. Supported by major orthopaedic oncology organizations, the meeting used a modified Delphi process to develop consensus statements through online questionnaires, thematic groupings, narrative reviews, and anonymous pre-meeting polling. Results. Strong (> 80%) consensus was achieved on 19 out of 21 statements, reflecting agreement among delegates. Key areas of consensus included the role of radiology in diagnosis and surveillance, the management of locally recurrent disease, and the treatment of dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma. Notably, there was agreement that routine chemotherapy has no role in chondrosarcoma treatment, and radiological surveillance is safe for intraosseous chondrosarcomas. Despite the overall consensus, areas of controversy remain, particularly regarding the treatment of atypical cartilage tumours and surgical margins. These unresolved issues underscore the need for further research and collaboration within the orthopaedic oncology community. Conclusion. BOOM represents the largest global consensus meeting in orthopaedic oncology, providing valuable guidance for clinicians managing chondrosarcoma worldwide. The consensus statements offer a reference for clinical practice, highlight key
A single-centre prospective randomized trial was conducted to
investigate whether a less intensive follow-up protocol would not
be inferior to a conventional follow-up protocol, in terms of overall
survival, in patients who have undergone surgery for sarcoma of
the limb. Initial short-term results were published in 2014. The primary objective was to show non-inferiority of a chest
radiograph (CXR) group compared with a CT scan group, and of a less
frequent (six-monthly) group than a more frequent (three-monthly)
group, in two-by-two comparison. The primary outcome was overall
survival and the secondary outcome was a recurrence-free survival.
Five-year survival was compared between the CXR and CT scan groups
and between the three-monthly and six-monthly groups. Of 500 patients
who were enrolled, 476 were available for follow-up. Survival analyses
were performed on a per-protocol basis (n = 412).Aims
Patients and Methods