ArticleActa orthopaedica2024
Clinical outcome of curettage in atypical cartilaginous tumors of the long bones: a descriptive cohort study.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The radiomics fingerprint of cartilage tumours: radiomics-based MRI differentiation of enchondroma and atypical cartilaginous tumour.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Machine learning vs. radiomics for discriminating atypical cartilaginous tumors from benign enchondromas on MRI.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Article
- Imaging findings and complications after curettage of atypical cartilaginous tumors in long bones: a retrospective single-center cohort study.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Chondrosarcoma organoids reveal SHH pathway activation driven by PTCH1 and BCOR alterations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The risk of pathological fractures after intralesional curettage in Atypical Cartilaginous Tumours: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of bone oncology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeDespite evolving management strategies for atypical cartilaginous tumors (ACT)-shifting from radical resection to intralesional curettage and "wait-and-scan" approaches-there remains no universal consensus on optimal treatment. We primarily aimed to evaluate disease-specific and progression-free survival following intralesional curettage and adjuvant phenol treatment of ACTs. Secondary aims included assessing surgical complications, the need for additional interventions, and an overview of long-term follow-up.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study of 388 ACT patients was conducted at a tertiary referral center from 2000 to 2019. Comprehensive data collection included demographics, tumor characteristics, and follow-up outcomes.
resultsResidual disease was observed in 14% (n = 53) of cases, with continued growth on sequential imaging in one-fourth (n = 13 of 53). Postoperative fractures occurred in 10% (n = 37) after a mean of 7 months, and 16% (n = 61) required a second surgery due to pain or joint movement limitations. There was no malignant progression or mortality observed.
conclusionWe found that curettage for ACT is not associated with mortality or malignant progression but does carry risks of complications and residual disease. This raises important questions regarding the necessity of surgical intervention. Further research is needed to refine the treatment approach for ACT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.