Evidence Hub

Pathological fracture in paediatric bone tumours and tumour-like lesions: A predictor of benign lesions?

Chaib B, Malhotra K, Khoo M, Saifuddin A

The British journal of radiology, 2021

231 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and causes of pathological fractures in paediatric bone tumours and tumour-like lesions, and to determine if they are predictive of benign lesions.

METHODS AND MATERIALS: Retrospective review of children with suspected bone tumours referred to a specialist musculoskeletal oncology service between September 2019 and August 2020. Data recorded included patient age and gender, lesion location, the presence of a pathological fracture on the initial plain radiograph, and the final diagnosis made either by image-guided biopsy/curettage or based on typical imaging features.

RESULTS: 231 patients were included with 233 lesions (138 males and 93 females with mean age 10.5 years, range 3 months-18 years). Final diagnosis was based on histology in 85 (36.5%) cases and imaging in 148 (63.5%) cases, 52 (22.3%) lesions classed as non-neoplastic, 139 (59.7%) as benign and 42 (18%) as malignant. Pathological fractures were seen in 41 cases (17.6%) at presentation, involving the humerus in 19 (46.3%), the femur in 14 (34.1%), the tibia in 3 (7.3%), the fibula and radius in two each (4.9%) and the second toe proximal phalanx in 1 (2.4%) (p < 0.001). The commonest underlying lesions included simple bone cyst (n = 17; 41.5%) and non-ossifying fibroma (n = 10; 24.4%). Only 4 cases (9.75%) were malignant, one case each of osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, leukaemia and BCOR undifferentiated round cell sarcoma. Pathological fracture occurred in 27.7% of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 231 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free