Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33094400›Full record

ReviewInternational orthopaedics2021

The impact of curettage technique on local control in giant cell tumour of bone.

Gennady N Machak, Andrey I Snetkov

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07315828 (A Prospective Study on the Accuracy of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging for the Visualization of Residual Lesions in the Tumor Cavity During Surgery for Giant Cell Tumor of Bone), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

NCT07315828 phase4recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Study on the Accuracy of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging for the Visualization of Residual Lesions in the Tumor Cavity During Surgery for Giant Cell Tumor of Bone

TypeinterventionalSponsorShanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's HospitalRan2026 to 2026Enrolled40ConditionsGiant Cell Tumor of BoneArmsIndocyanine Green
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gennady N MachakPriorov Central Institute for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Moscow, Russian Federation. machak.gennady@mail.ru.ORCID 0000-0003-1222-5066
Andrey I SnetkovPriorov Central Institute for Traumatology and Orthopedics, Moscow, Russian Federation.
Central Scientific Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough consensus has been reached regarding the main aspects of intralesional surgery for giant cell tumour of the bone (GCTB), debates continue about the most effective combination of local adjuvants. The purpose of study was to analyze the previous experience and determine the most effective curettage approach for GCTB.

methodsWe summarized the findings from 89 papers published from 1962 to 2020 related to this subject. Database consisted of 137 treated groups that included 6441 patients who underwent different curettage techniques without pre-operative administration of bisphosphonates or RANKL inhibitors.

resultsRecurrence rates after simple curettage ranged between 27 and 82% with a median value at 47%. The use of one or two local adjuvants reduced the incidence of recurrences approximately by 50% when compared with simple curettage. High-speed burring combined with chemical adjuvants or followed by poly(methyl methacrylate) cementation with or without bone grafting further improved the local control leading to good and excellent results; however, these were not documented in all studies. Simultaneous use of burring, chemical adjuvants, and cementation, which we named here as combined curettage, allowed to down local relapses to the range of 0-26%, with a median at 11%. Oncologic outcomes after combined curettage are significantly better when compared with simple curettage (p < 0.0001) and other variants of enhancement (p = 0.001).

conclusionsCombined curettage appears to provide the most potent and comprehensive impact on residual tumour cells located in risk zones. This approach should be considered for locally advanced tumours when function-preserving surgery is planned. Additional comparative studies are required to define the optimal curettage enhancement for each individual patient.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsGiant Cell Tumor of BoneCurettageHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesAdjuvantsBone tumoursCurettageGiant cell tumourRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID33094400
OpenAlexW3094109383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.