The recognition of a malignant soft tissue mass can be challenging, given the rarity of soft tissue sarcoma and the extensive overlap between benign and malignant presentations. Awareness of the signs and symptoms of soft tissue sarcoma in primary care practice ensures prompt referral to a sarcoma center for appropriate assessment and treatment to optimize outcomes.

It is estimated that more than half of all cancers develop bony metastases, exacting a substantial cost in terms of patient quality of life and healthcare expenses. Prompt diagnosis and management have been shown to reduce morbidity and costs. When a patient with a history of cancer presents with musculoskeletal pain, heightened awareness of the risk of bone metastasis should prompt immediate referral to an orthopedic specialist. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to identify an appropriate treatment plan for the patient based on the prognosis, fracture status, and extent of skeletal disease. KEY POINTSMore than 50% of patients with cancer survive their disease for at least 10 years, making durable reconstruction in metastatic skeletal disease more important.Most patients with metastatic bone disease present to an orthopedic team after a pathologic fracture has already occurred, increasing the likelihood of discomfort and morbidity.Awareness of the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges associated with metastatic bone disease is essential for timely referral to an orthopedic specialist.

No abstract

Advancements in modern technology and experimental techniques have provided an insight into how ageing affects properties of MSCs. However, it is evident that further work needs to be conducted due to many mixed reviews and conflicting data. Given that the human life expectancy is expected to increase the topic of cell ageing and therapeutic applications will remain a hot topic in years to come.

BackgroundPrimary bone and soft tissue sarcoma treatment includes surgical resection, with or without peri-operative chemoradiotherapy. The aim of surgery is to achieve complete excision, to prevent localised recurrence and achieve cure. For various reasons, excision with adequate margins is not always possible. Our aim is to assess the occurrence of unexpected positive margins following primary excision within a tertiary centre and the impact on patient outcomes. MethodsA retrospective analysis of 567 patients discussed at the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital Multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting with positive margins between 1999-2020 was performed. Exclusion criteria included: excisions performed externally and lesions treated with curettage. Information gathering from electronic records highlighted 23 cases with unexpected positive margins following primary excision. ResultsAll patients pre-operatively expected to achieve complete primary resection. The median age was 60 years (8-92), 10M:13F. Tumour location included lower limb (12), upper limb (six), pelvis (two) and trunk (three); eight bone tumours and 15 soft tissue. The overall recurrence rate was 30.4% (7/23). In those recommended for re-excision (n=16), the recurrence rate was 31.25% (5/16). Of the patients not initially recommended for re-excision (n=7), four proceeded to surveillance alone with 50% recurrence (2/4), both with metastatic disease not surviving to follow-up. A further three patients underwent post-operative radiotherapy alone with no recurrences at follow-up, one patient not surviving for further treatment due to stroke. The mean follow-up for patients was 3.1 years. ConclusionWhen positive margins do occur unexpectedly, the impact due to the need for further treatment and ultimately increased risk of recurrence can be significant. Results can be compared to those for unplanned excisions. Therefore, surgeons should be aware of the different circumstances in which positive margins occur to help guide treatment planning and managing patient expectations.