Search

Purpose: Primary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous tumour. En bloc resection, in contrast to intralesional resection, is the only procedure able to provide Enneking appropriate (EA) margins, which has improved local control and survival of patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of local recurrence, metastases development and survival in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine submitted to Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI) procedures.Methods: A systematic search was performed on EBSCO, PubMed and Web of Science, between 1966 and 2018, to identify studies evaluating patients submitted to resection of primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Two reviewers independently assessed all reports. The outcomes were local recurrence, metastases development and survival at 12, 24 and 60 months.Results: Five studies (108 patients) were included for systematic review. These studies support the conclusion that EA procedure has a lower local recurrence rate (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17-0.66), a lower metastases development rate (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89) and a higher survival rate at 24 months (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.24-2.55) and 60 months (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42) of follow-up; however, at 12 months, there is a non-significant difference.Conclusions: EA procedure increases the ratio of remission and survival after 24 months of follow-up. Multidisciplinary oncologic groups should weigh the morbidity of an en bloc resection, knowing that in the first year the probability of survival is the same for EA and EI procedures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bone giant cell tumors, although benign, may be locally aggressive and cause severe morbidity; in some cases, they can also disseminate at distance and cause death. Denosumab has been approved to treat unresectable bone giant cell tumors or when surgery is likely to result in severe morbidity. Furthermore, its curative potential has been recently suggested. Case: An 18-year-old girl presented with a spinal giant cell tumor at T9. Neo-adjuvant denosumab was administered for 9 months with great clinical and analytical tolerance. A posterior left T9 costo-transversectomy and vertebral body curettage was performed and the spine stabilized. Interestingly, histopathology examination of the surgical specimens found no evidence of tumoral cells. Denosumab was reinstated until completion of 12 months of treatment. Conclusion: Denosumab has an important but still limited role in the treatment of spinal giant cell tumors. Here, it resulted in complete histological resolution of the tumor, potentially widening its applicability from a strictly neo-adjuvant to a curative role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]