HOMEPRODUCTSCOMPANYCONTACTFAQResearchDictionaryPharmaSign Up FREE or Login

Interventions for treating simple bone cysts in the long bones of children.

AbstractBACKGROUND:
Simple bone cysts, also known as a unicameral bone cysts or solitary bone cysts, are the most common type of benign bone lesion in growing children. Cysts may lead to repeated pathological fracture (fracture that occurs in an area of bone weakened by a disease process). Occasionally, these fractures may result in symptomatic malunion. The main goals of treatment are to decrease the risk of pathological fracture, enhance cyst healing and resolve pain. Despite the numerous treatment methods that have been used for simple bone cysts in long bones of children, there is no consensus on the best procedure.
OBJECTIVES:
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of interventions for treating simple bone cysts in the long bones of children, including adolescents.We intended the following main comparisons: invasive (e.g. injections, curettage, surgical fixation) versus non-invasive interventions (e.g. observation, plaster cast, restricted activity); different categories of invasive interventions (i.e. injections, curettage, drilling holes and decompression, surgical fixation and continued decompression); different variations of each category of invasive intervention (e.g. different injection substances: autologous bone marrow versus steroid).
SEARCH METHODS:
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2013 Issue 12), MEDLINE (1946 to 12 December 2013), EMBASE (1974 to 12 December 2013) and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Platform (31 December 2013). We also searched trial registers, conference proceedings and reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA:
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating methods for treating simple bone cysts in the long bones of children.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
Two review authors independently screened search results and performed study selection. We resolved differences in opinion between review authors by discussion and by consulting a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and data extraction. We summarised data using risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs), as appropriate, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the overall quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS:
The only included trial was a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted at 24 locations in North America and India that compared bone marrow injection with steroid (methylprednisolone acetate) injection for treating simple bone cysts. Up to three injections were planned for participants in each group. The trial involved 90 children (mean age 9.5 years) and presented results for 77 children at two-year follow-up. Although the trial had secure allocation concealment, it was at high risk of performance bias and from major imbalances in baseline characteristics. Reflecting these study limitations, we downgraded the quality of evidence by two levels to 'low' for most outcomes, meaning that we are unsure about the estimates of effect. For outcomes where there was serious imprecision, we downgraded the quality of evidence by a further level to 'very low'.The trial provided very low quality evidence that fewer children in the bone marrow injection group had radiographically assessed healing of bone cysts at two years than in the steroid injection group (9/39 versus 16/38; RR 0.55 favouring steroid injection, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.09). However, the result was uncertain and may be compatible with no difference or small benefit favouring bone marrow injection. Based on an illustrative success rate of 421 children with healed bone cysts per 1000 children treated with steroid injections, this equates to 189 fewer (95% CI 303 fewer to 38 more) children with healed bone cysts per 1000 children treated with bone marrow injections. There was low quality evidence of a lack of difference between the two interventions at two years in functional outcome, based on the Activity Scale for Kids function score (0 to 100; higher scores equate to better outcome: MD -0.90; 95% CI -4.26 to 2.46) or in pain assessed using the Oucher pain score. There was very low quality evidence of a lack of differences between the two interventions for adverse events: subsequent pathological fracture (9/39 versus 11/38; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.70) or superficial infection (two cases in the bone marrow group). Recurrence of bone cyst, unacceptable malunion, return to normal activities, and participant satisfaction were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:
The available evidence is insufficient to determine the relative effects of bone marrow versus steroid injections, although the bone marrow injections are more invasive. Noteably, the rate of radiographically assessed healing of the bone cyst at two years was well under 50% for both interventions. Overall, there is a lack of evidence to determine the best method for treating simple bone cysts in the long bones of children. Further RCTs of sufficient size and quality are needed to guide clinical practice.
AuthorsJia-Guo Zhao, Ning Ding, Wan-Jie Huang, Jia Wang, Jian Shang, Peng Zhang
JournalThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Cochrane Database Syst Rev) Issue 9 Pg. CD010847 (Sep 02 2014) ISSN: 1469-493X [Electronic] England
PMID25180476 (Publication Type: Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Review, Systematic Review)
Chemical References
  • Glucocorticoids
  • Methylprednisolone Acetate
  • Methylprednisolone
Topics
  • Adolescent
  • Bone Cysts (drug therapy)
  • Bone Marrow Transplantation (methods)
  • Child
  • Glucocorticoids (administration & dosage)
  • Humans
  • Methylprednisolone (administration & dosage, analogs & derivatives)
  • Methylprednisolone Acetate
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Join CureHunter, for free Research Interface BASIC access!

Take advantage of free CureHunter research engine access to explore the best drug and treatment options for any disease. Find out why thousands of doctors, pharma researchers and patient activists around the world use CureHunter every day.
Realize the full power of the drug-disease research graph!


Choose Username:
Email:
Password:
Verify Password:
Enter Code Shown: