Construction of Clinical Score System of Pelvis Giant Cell Tumors and Primary Clinical Verification
郑凯,于秀淳,胡永成,王臻,吴苏稼,叶招明,蔡郑东
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2352.2016.08.001
2016-01-01
Abstract:Objective To establish a clinical score system of giant cell tumors (GCT) and verify it by retrospective investigation of the patients with pelvic GCT.Methods Basing on the consensus of experts from giant cell tumor of China,this study established a clinical score system of giant cell tumors using Delphi method and analytic hierarchy process.Important indicators and secondary indicators in the score system were filtrated from some indicators which affect clinical treatments and prognostic factors with Delphi method while the scores for the secondary indicators were calculated with analytic hierarchy process.Thirty-eight patients with GCTs in pelvis were included from Jan 2001 to Jan 2013.According to the scoring system to calculate scores of these clinical cases,this study analyzed the relationship between scores and clinical outcomes,treatments and postoperative function.This retrospective study was used to verify the accuracy of the scoring system.Results There were four important indicators and twelve secondary indicators in this scoring system.The four important indicators included tumor location,tumor size,soft tissue mass and pelvic ring continuity.There were three secondary indicators in each important indicator.For tumor location,the tumor in ilium or ischio-pubic area can get one point,the tumor in acetabulum can get two points,and the tumor involving the above two areas can get three points.For tumor size,in the X-ray film of standard pelvic anteroposterior,nine sub-grid was used for half of the pelvis,the tumor size in one grid could get one point,the tumor size in two grid could get two points and what exceed two grid could get three points.For soft tissue mass,no soft tissue mass could get one point,the soft mass occurring only on one side could get two points,and the soft mass occurring on two side could get three points.For pelvic ring continuity,the normal continuity could get one point,continuity failure occurring in a non-weight-bearing area could get two points,and continuity failure occurring in a weight-bearing area could get three points.One patient could receive a minimum 4 points and a maximum 12 points.For these thirty-eight patients with an average point 7.8 (4-12),there are 12 patients scoring 4-6 points,17patients scoring 7-9 points,and 9 patients scoring 10-12 points.No obvious difference was found in the three scoring groups including gender,age,age composition,excision method and follow-up time.There were some statistical differences in the three scoring groups including resection method,reconstruction,recurrence,complications and MSTS functional score (x2=19.358,P=0.001;x2=16.559,P=0.002;x2=8.015,P=0.018;x2=8.782,P=0.012;F=6.837,P=0.003).En-bloc resection,complicated reconstruction,bad local control,complication and bad limb function was likely to appear in high scoring patients.Conclusion Pelvic bone giant cell tumor clinical scoring system covers the main factors affecting the pelvic bone giant cell tumor treatment options and prognosis estimation,there is a guiding role in clinical prognosis and tumor therapy.