Background: A musculoskeletal tumor biopsy can involve fine needle aspiration, core needle biopsy, or incisional biopsy. Controversy regarding the diagnostic yield of these biopsy techniques continues. The purpose of this article is to summarize the current concepts in the biopsy of musculoskeletal tumors. Methods: We performed a literature review of clinical articles reporting on the biopsy of bone and soft-tissue primary tumors. Clinical articles were excluded on the basis on abstract content if they represented case reports, review or opinion articles, or technique descriptions. Eighteen of the thirty-nine articles that remained were excluded because the results did not indicate the diagnostic accuracy of the various biopsy techniques. Thus, twenty-one articles with diagnostic data on the biopsy of bone and soft-tissue tumors were included in this review. Results: Core needle biopsy appeared to be more accurate than fine needle aspiration, and incisional biopsy appeared to be more accurate than both of these techniques, but the differences did not reach significance. Incisional biopsy was more expensive than the percutaneous biopsy methods. In deep musculoskeletal tumors, incorporation of ultrasonography or computed tomography for guidance is easy and safe and can be useful for increasing the accuracy of the biopsy. Advantages of a percutaneous technique compared with an incisional one are the low risk of contamination and the minimally invasive nature. Certain anatomic locations and histologic types were associated with diagnostic difficulty. Vertebral tumors had the lowest diagnostic accuracy regardless of the biopsy technique. Myxoid, infection, and round cell histologies were associated with the lowest diagnostic accuracy. Conclusions: The current literature has not clarified the optimal biopsy technique for the diagnosis of bone and soft-tissue tumors. However, core needle biopsy is usually preferable to incisional biopsy because of the low risk of contamination and the low cost. In addition, the use of imaging guidance increases the diagnostic accuracy of musculoskeletal biopsies and reduces the risk of complications. If the result of a percutaneous biopsy is nondiagnostic, a small incisional biopsy should be performed. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The tumor microenvironment promotes cancer progression and cell migration

Dislocation represents the most common complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Understanding risk factors for dislocation has a great clinical relevance for every hip surgeon in order to consider all surgical options for effective planning. The aim of this systematic review was to answer two main questions—(1) what are the risk factors for instability after rTHA? and (2) what are the best preoperative assessments and surgical options to avoid dislocation after rTHA? Scientific databases were accessed to identify papers dealing with prevention and treatment of dislocation after rTHA. We performed a search using the keywords ‘revision hip arthroplasty’ and ‘dislocation’, ‘instability’, ‘outcome’, ‘failure’, ‘treatment’. After removal of duplicates and exclusion of works published in different languages, 33 articles were reviewed completely. Risk factors were analysed in order to establish the most relevant and evidence-based treatments available in the current literature. The risk of dislocation after rTHA can be reduced using some precautions inferred from the literature. The use of a larger femoral and acetabular component, elevated rim liner and dual mobility implants can significantly reduce the risk of dislocation after rTHA. However, care must be taken regarding patient-related risk factors since these cannot be addressed and modified. Hence, a complete evaluation of risk factors should be performed for each patient and procedure before starting rTHA.

Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease is the single most common diagnosis associated with cavus foot. The imbalance involving intrinsic and extrinsic muscles has been suggested as the main pathogenetic cause of cavus foot in this disease. The goal of surgical treatment is to correct the deformity to obtain a plantigrade foot. In the presence of a flexible deformity and the absence of degenerative arthritis, preserving as much as possible of the overall range of motion of the foot and ankle is advisable. Twenty-four cavus feet in twelve patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease were included in the study. Clinical evaluation was summarized with the Maryland Foot Score. Radiographic evaluation assessed calcaneal pitch, Meary angle, Hibb angle, and absence of degenerative joint changes. Only patients who had a flexible deformity, with varus of the heel reducible in the Coleman-Andreasi test, and did not have degenerative joint arthritis were included in this study. Surgical treatment consisted in plantar fasciotomy, midtarsal osteotomy, extensor hallucis longus tendon transfer to the first metatarsal (Jones procedure), and dorsiflexion osteotomy of the first metatarsal. Mean follow-up was six years (range, two to thirteen years). The mean Maryland Foot Score was 72 preoperatively and 86 postoperatively. The postoperative result was rated as excellent in twelve feet (50%), good in ten (42%), and fair in two (8%). Mean calcaneal pitch was 34° preoperatively and 24° at the time of the latest follow-up, the mean Hibb angle was 121° preoperatively and 136° postoperatively, and the mean Meary angle was 25° preoperatively and 2° postoperatively. Plantar fasciotomy, midtarsal osteotomy, the Jones procedure, and dorsiflexion osteotomy of the first metatarsal yielded adequate correction of flexible cavus feet in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease in the absence of fixed hindfoot deformity. The fact that the improvement in the outcome score was only modest may be attributable to the lack of motor balance. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.