Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25277133›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2014

Local control of giant cell tumors of the long bone after aggressive curettage with and without bone cement.

Zhen-hua Gao, Jun-qiang Yin, Xian-biao Xie, Chang-ye Zou, Gang Huang, Jin Wang, Jing-nan Shen

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Benign Bone Tumors: An Overview of What We Know Today.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. CORR InsightsClinical orthopaedics and related research · 2017
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhen-hua Gao
Jun-qiang Yin
Xian-biao Xie
Chang-ye Zou
Gang Huang
Jin Wang
Jing-nan ShenDepartment of Orthopaedics, First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 58# zhongshan 2 road, Guangzhou 510080, P,R, China. shenjingnan@126.com.
The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAggressive curettage has been well established for the treatment of giant cell tumors (GCTs) of the bone. The purpose of this study was to review our experience and evaluate the role of different implant materials in patients with GCTs of the extremities after aggressive curettage.

methodsA total of 119 patients with GCTs of the long bone were treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University between 2004 and 2009. We excluded patients presenting metastases, recurrent tumors, and soft tissue involvement and those with Jaffe pathological grade III. The remaining 65 patients were treated with aggressive curettage using a bone graft or bone cement to fill the cavity. The recurrence rates and functional scores associated with the different fillings were analyzed.

resultsAggressive curettage and bone grafting was performed in 34 cases (52.3%), and aggressive curettage with bone cement was performed in 31 cases (47.7%). The overall recurrence rate after the aggressive intralesional procedures was 35.3% with bone grafting and 12.9% when bone cement was used as an adjuvant filling. The recurrence rate following aggressive curettage and bone grafting was higher than that following aggressive curettage with cement (p = 0.038). The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score for bone graft patients was 91.1%, which was significantly lower than that for patients treated with bone cement (94.7%).

conclusionsThe use of bone cement was associated with a significantly lower recurrence rate than bone grafting following aggressive intralesional curettage to treat benign giant cell tumors of the long bone. Better MSTS functional results were also observed in the bone cement group compared to the bone graft group.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBone CementsBone NeoplasmsCurettageDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGiant Cell Tumor of BoneHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographyRetrospective StudiesTibiaBone Cements

Identifiers

PMID25277133
PMCPMC4196200
OpenAlexW2075593962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.