[Pelvic chondrosarcomas: Surgical treatment options.]

Service de chirurgie orthopédique B, hôpital Cochin, 27, rue du Faubourg-Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France.
Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique 10/2009; 95(6):491-499. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.05.004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Introduction
Chondrosarcoma (CS) is a primary malignant bone tumor with cartilaginous differentiation. The only available treatment is carcinological surgical resection since the usual adjuvant treatments are ineffective. The pelvic location creates specific technical difficulties both for exeresis and reconstruction. Our objective was to evaluate the carcinological and functional outcomes of inter-ilioabdominal amputation and conservative surgery.

Materials and methods
We retrospectively studied 59 cases of pelvis chondrosarcoma managed in our department between 1968 and 2003. Demographic, anatomopathological, surgical and survival data were analyzed. Survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier curves and the cumulative incidence method. Multivariate analysis was used to identify all possible independent prognostic variables.

There were 33 men and 26 women, with an average age of 48 years. The average follow-up duration was 94 months. Eleven patients had a grade 1 chondrosarcoma, 36 a grade 2 chondrosarcoma, five were grade 3, and seven were dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma. Eleven patients underwent an inter-ilioabdominal disarticulation, and 48 had a more conservative surgery. Resection margins proved healthy in 46 patients (78%). Eighteen patients (31%) had a local recurrence, and 12 (20%) had metastases. At last follow-up, 30 patients (51%) were still alive without any sign of recurrence. Twenty-three patients (39%) died from the disease. Multivariate analysis showed that margin invasion was associated with a definitely increased local recurrence rate. A high tumoral grade was correlated with a greater risk of metastases occurrence. These two last factors (margin status and tumor grade) as well as acetabulum involvement were correlated with a reduced survival rate.
Function was better among patients treated by conservative surgery, and among them, even better when the peri-acetabular area remained intact.
Our study confirmed that resection margins quality is a major prognostic factor both for local control and for survival. On the other hand, local recurrence is an adverse survival prognosis factor and is itself correlated with resection margins quality.
Peri-acetabular chondrosarcoma location (in zone 2) appears to be a poor oncological prognosis factor since, in this location, obtaining healthy margins appears particularly difficult.
Compared to resection, inter-ilioabdominal amputation did not prove its superiority concerning resection margins quality or survival. However, resection guaranteed a better functional outcome.

Chondrosarcoma of the pelvic girdle remains of worse prognosis than peripheral bones chondrosarcoma since the critical prognosis factor is the resection margins quality. This location, and especially the peri-acetabular zone, poses difficult specific technical problems when conservative surgery is selected. Various imaging techniques should help better envision tumor resection extent. Inter-ilioabdominal amputation should only be resorted to in non-metastatic patients, when the tumor does not seem to be removable with sufficient healthy margins guarantee, or when local conditions make it impossible to hope for a good quality reconstruction.

Level of Evidence
Level IV; therapeutic retrospective study.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate morbidity, oncologic results and functional outcome in patients with malignant tumors of pelvis treated with limb sparing resection. Between March 2002 and November 2010, 106 cases of non metastatic malignant pelvic tumors were treated with limb sparing resections of pelvis. Diagnosis included chondrosarcoma (65), Ewing's sarcoma (25), osteogenic sarcoma (10), synovial sarcoma (3) and malignant fibrous histiocytoma, high grade sarcoma, epitheloid hemangiothelioma (1 each). Three patients had intralesional surgery because of erroneous pre-operative diagnosis of benign tumor and were excluded from final analysis. Remaining 103 patients underwent limb sparing resections with intent to achieve tumor free margins. In 1 case, an intraoperative cardiac event lead to the surgery being abandoned. Reconstruction was done in 2 of 38 cases that did not include resection of acetabulum. For 64 resections involving acetabulum various reconstruction modalities were used. Surgical margins were involved in 20 patients. Forty five patients had complications. 91 patients were available for follow up. Follow up of survivors ranged from 24 to 122 months (mean 55 months).Twenty one patients (23%) had local recurrence. Sixty patients are currently alive, 46 being continuously disease free. Overall survival was 67% at 5 years. Patients in whom acetabulum was retained had better function (mean MSTS score 27) compared to patients in whom acetabulum was resected (mean MSTS score 22). Though complex and challenging, limb sparing surgery in non metastatic malignant tumors is oncologically safe and has better functional outcomes than after an amputation surgery.
    European journal of surgical oncology: the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology 11/2013; 40(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.017 · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Studies for patients with pelvic chondrosarcomas are limited. This study determines the outcome of patients with pelvic chondrosarcomas, and whether there is any association with tumors' grade, type, stage, margins and pelvic location. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 215 patients with pelvic chondrosarcomas. All patients had biopsy and histological diagnosis of their tumors followed by limb salvage or amputation. We staged patients using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society system. We performed a univariate and multivariate analysis of the survival to death, local recurrence and metastasis with respect to grade, type (central vs. peripheral), stage, margins, and pelvic location, and the survival to death of patients with and without local recurrence. RESULTS: Grade was the most important univariate and multivariate predictor of the survival of the patients. Dedifferentiation was associated with significantly lower overall survival. Peripheral chondrosarcomas predicted survival only in the univariate analysis. Surgical margins predicted local recurrence only in the multivariate analysis. Periacetabular location was associated with lower survival to death and local recurrence. The occurrence of local recurrence compromises the overall survival. CONCLUSION: Grade was the most important predictor of the overall survival of patients with chondrosarcomas of the pelvis. J. Surg. Oncol. 2013 9999:XX-XX. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Journal of Surgical Oncology 07/2013; 108(1). DOI:10.1002/jso.23351 · 2.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Los condrosarcomas son tumores malignos primarios de estirpe condral. Se trata de un grupo heterogéneo de tumores que pueden caracterizarse por su localización en el hueso (central, o condrosarcoma convencional, o en la superficie del hueso, condrosarcoma propiamente dicho). Los tumores se distinguen por el aspecto histológico, además de la forma frecuente (donde existe diferenciación del tumor en cartílago hialino). Se observan condrosarcomas de células claras, desdiferenciados y mesenquimatosos. Además, se reconocen los formados a partir de una lesión cartilaginosa preexistente (osteocondroma o condroma), denominados «condrosarcomas secundarios». El condrosarcoma desarrollado sobre un osteocondroma también se conoce como «condrosarcoma periférico». Los condrosarcomas no son sensibles a la quimioterapia y son relativamente resistentes a la radioterapia. El tratamiento se basa en la resección quirúrgica. Estudios recientes de caracterización biológica permiten entrever posibilidades de tratamiento médico adyuvante.
    02/2014; 47(1):1–14. DOI:10.1016/S1286-935X(14)66938-0


Available from