Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Chondromyxoid Fibroma

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Chondromyxoid Fibroma

Rare benign cartilaginous tumor with characteristic lobular myxoid matrix and eccentric metaphyseal location

complete
Updated: 2025-12-25
High Yield Overview

CHONDROMYXOID FIBROMA

Rarest Benign Cartilaginous Tumor | Eccentric Metaphyseal Lesion | Lobular Myxoid Pattern

Under 1%of all primary bone tumors
10-30years peak age
M 2:1 Fmale predominance
25%recurrence after curettage

IMAGING PATTERN

Eccentric
PatternMetaphyseal location, cortical based
TreatmentCurettage and bone grafting
Scalloped
PatternEndosteal scalloping pattern
TreatmentWide excision if aggressive

Critical Must-Knows

  • Rarest benign cartilaginous tumor - less than 1% of primary bone tumors, often misdiagnosed
  • Eccentric metaphyseal location - classic pattern with endosteal scalloping and cortical expansion
  • Lobular histology - characteristic lobules with myxoid matrix, hypercellular periphery, sparse central cells
  • High recurrence rate - 25% after simple curettage; consider adjuvants (phenol, PMMA, cryotherapy)
  • Can mimic chondrosarcoma - both clinically and histologically, requiring expert pathology review

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Know the classic imaging triad: eccentric metaphyseal, scalloped margin, sclerotic rim
  • "
    Histology pearl: hypercellular periphery with spindle cells vs hypocellular myxoid center - opposite pattern to chondrosarcoma
  • "
    Be prepared to discuss differential diagnosis: chondroblastoma, ABC, chondrosarcoma, fibrous dysplasia
  • "
    Understand treatment controversy: curettage alone (high recurrence) vs curettage with adjuvants vs en bloc resection

Clinical Imaging

Imaging Gallery

Chondromyxoid fibroma from case 1 exhibiting a pseudolobulated growth pattern of stellate or spindle-shaped cells in a myxoid stroma with zones of greater cellularity at the periphery of the lobules.
Click to expand
Chondromyxoid fibroma from case 1 exhibiting a pseudolobulated growth pattern of stellate or spindle-shaped cells in a myxoid stroma with zones of greCredit: Yasuda T et al. via Mod. Pathol. via Open-i (NIH) (Open Access (CC BY))
Patient with the lesion protruding out of the mouth
Click to expand
Patient with the lesion protruding out of the mouthCredit: Fomete B et al. via Ann Maxillofac Surg via Open-i (NIH) (Open Access (CC BY))
The patient intraoperative after resection and disarticulation
Click to expand
The patient intraoperative after resection and disarticulationCredit: Fomete B et al. via Ann Maxillofac Surg via Open-i (NIH) (Open Access (CC BY))
Photomichrograph of chondromyxoid fibroma H and E, ×100. It shows chondroid and fibromyxoid areas
Click to expand
Photomichrograph of chondromyxoid fibroma H and E, ×100. It shows chondroid and fibromyxoid areasCredit: Fomete B et al. via Ann Maxillofac Surg via Open-i (NIH) (Open Access (CC BY))

Critical Chondromyxoid Fibroma Exam Points

Rarest Cartilage Tumor

Under 1% of bone tumors. Most orthopaedic surgeons will see few cases in their career. High index of suspicion needed for eccentric metaphyseal lesion in young adult. Often initially misdiagnosed.

Distinguishing From Chondrosarcoma

Histology can be misleading. Hypercellular areas at lobule periphery may mimic malignancy. Key: CMF has sparse central cells with myxoid matrix; chondrosarcoma has permeative pattern and nuclear atypia.

Classic Imaging Pattern

Eccentric metaphyseal location with endosteal scalloping, cortical expansion, sclerotic rim. Proximal tibia most common (25-30%). Radiographically similar to chondroblastoma but different age.

High Recurrence Risk

25% recurrence after curettage. Consider adjuvants: phenol, liquid nitrogen, argon beam, PMMA cement. En bloc resection for aggressive lesions or recurrent disease.

Quick Decision Guide

ScenarioImaging PatternManagementKey Pearl
Young adult, incidental finding, small lesionEccentric, sclerotic rim, no soft tissueObservation with serial radiographsMany are asymptomatic incidental findings
Symptomatic lesion, typical imagingMetaphyseal, scalloped, well-definedExtended curettage with adjuvantUse phenol or cryotherapy to reduce recurrence
Aggressive features, pathological fractureCortical breakthrough, soft tissue massWide excision with reconstructionConsider en bloc for expendable bones (fibula, rib)
Mnemonic

MYXOIDDiagnostic Features of Chondromyxoid Fibroma

M
Metaphyseal location
Eccentric metaphyseal lesion in long bones
Y
Young adults
Peak age 10-30 years, slightly older than chondroblastoma
X
X-ray shows scalloping
Endosteal scalloping with sclerotic rim
O
One percent of bone tumors
Rarest benign cartilage tumor, under 1%
I
Ilium and tibia common
Proximal tibia 25-30%, pelvis 15%, distal femur 15%
D
Distinguished by lobular pattern
Lobules with myxoid center, hypercellular periphery

Memory Hook:MYXOID - the name tells you it has MYXOID matrix! Think rare, eccentric metaphyseal, scalloped lesion in young adult.

Mnemonic

LOBULARHistologic Lobules Pattern

L
Lobules
Characteristic lobular architecture
O
Outer hypercellular zone
Spindle and stellate cells at periphery
B
Bland central cells
Sparse cells in myxoid center
U
Uniform lobule pattern
Repeating lobular units throughout
L
Lacks atypia
No significant nuclear pleomorphism (benign)
A
Abundant myxoid matrix
Myxochondroid matrix centrally in lobules
R
Reverse of chondrosarcoma
Opposite cellular pattern compared to malignancy

Memory Hook:LOBULAR architecture is the key! Hypercellular periphery, hypocellular myxoid center - remember this REVERSE pattern.

Mnemonic

SCALLOPDifferential Diagnosis

S
Solitary bone cyst
But lacks lobular histology
C
Chondroblastoma
Epiphyseal location, younger age, chicken-wire calcification
A
Aneurysmal bone cyst
Blood-filled spaces, different histology
L
Low-grade chondrosarcoma
Most important distinction - permeative pattern, atypia
L
Langerhans cell histiocytosis
Different demographics and histology
O
Osteoblastoma
Central nidus, different matrix
P
Plasmacytoma
Older age, punched-out lesion, plasma cells

Memory Hook:Think SCALLOP for the scalloped endosteal margin! Run through differentials of eccentric metaphyseal lesions.

Overview and Epidemiology

Clinical Significance

Chondromyxoid fibroma (CMF) is the rarest benign cartilaginous tumor, accounting for less than 1% of all primary bone tumors and approximately 2% of benign bone tumors. First described by Jaffe and Lichtenstein in 1948, it remains one of the most diagnostically challenging bone lesions due to its rarity and potential to mimic chondrosarcoma both radiographically and histologically. Most orthopaedic surgeons will encounter only a handful of cases throughout their career, making high clinical suspicion and expert pathology review essential for accurate diagnosis.

Demographics

  • Age: 10-30 years (second to third decade)
  • Gender: Male predominance 2:1
  • Location: Metaphysis of long bones (70%)
  • Most common sites: Proximal tibia (25-30%), distal femur (15%), pelvis (15%)
  • Rare locations: Skull, ribs, small bones of hands/feet

Natural History

  • Growth pattern: Slow-growing, locally aggressive
  • Symptoms: Often asymptomatic, found incidentally
  • Duration: Symptoms present for months to years
  • Recurrence: 25% after simple curettage, 10% with adjuvants
  • Malignancy: Exceedingly rare malignant transformation reported

Geographic and Anatomic Distribution

CMF can occur in any bone but shows predilection for metaphyseal regions of long bones, particularly around the knee. Pelvic involvement, especially the iliac wing, is more common than with other benign cartilaginous tumors. Rare axial skeleton involvement (ribs, skull base) can present with unique challenges due to anatomic constraints and difficulty distinguishing from chordoma or chondrosarcoma.

Pathophysiology and Histopathology

Tumor Origin and Biology

The exact cell of origin for CMF remains debated. Theories include:

  • Cartilage rest theory: Aberrant cartilage differentiation from primitive mesenchyme
  • Metaplastic theory: Fibrous tissue undergoing cartilaginous metaplasia
  • Neoplastic chondroblast: Benign proliferation of immature cartilage-forming cells

Biological Behavior

CMF is a benign but locally aggressive lesion that grows slowly by expansion and endosteal erosion. Unlike true cartilaginous neoplasms (enchondroma, chondrosarcoma), CMF lacks classic hyaline cartilage and instead contains abundant myxochondroid (myxoid and chondroid) matrix. This unique composition reflects its intermediate position between fibrous and cartilaginous lesions, hence the name "chondro-myxo-fibroma."

Gross Pathology

Macroscopic Appearance

  • Color: Gray-white to tan-yellow
  • Consistency: Firm, lobulated, rubbery to gritty
  • Borders: Well-circumscribed, may have thin shell
  • Hemorrhage: Occasional areas of hemorrhage
  • Cysts: Focal cystic degeneration possible

Surgical Findings

  • Cortical thinning: Expansion from within
  • Endosteal scalloping: Characteristic pattern
  • Soft tissue: Usually no soft tissue extension
  • Curettage yield: Gelatinous to gritty tissue
  • Boundaries: Pseudocapsule often present

Microscopic Histology - The Diagnostic Hallmark

Lobular Pattern is Pathognomonic

The lobular architecture of CMF is its most distinctive histologic feature. Each lobule consists of three zones:

  1. Central zone: Sparse stellate and spindle cells in abundant myxoid or chondroid matrix
  2. Intermediate zone: Increased cellularity with chondroblast-like cells
  3. Peripheral zone: Hypercellular rim of spindle cells, osteoclast-like giant cells, and reactive bone

This zonal pattern repeats throughout the lesion and is separated by fibrous septa. The hypercellular periphery can be mistaken for chondrosarcoma, but the bland cytology, lack of permeative growth, and myxoid center distinguish CMF.

H&E histology of chondromyxoid fibroma showing pseudolobulated architecture
Click to expand
Classic CMF histology (H&E): Pseudolobulated architecture with pale pink/blue myxoid stroma containing stellate and spindle-shaped cells. Note the lobular pattern with areas of increased cellularity at lobule periphery (darker zones) - the pathognomonic feature distinguishing CMF from other cartilage tumors.Credit: Yasuda T et al., Mod Pathol - CC BY
H&E histology showing fibromyxoid and chondroid areas of CMF
Click to expand
CMF histology (H&E, x100): Dual nature of the tumor with fibromyxoid stroma (left, pale pink) transitioning to more cellular chondroid areas (right). The myxoid matrix contains scattered stellate and spindle cells. This reflects the tumor's intermediate position between fibrous and cartilaginous lesions.Credit: Fomete B et al., Ann Maxillofac Surg - CC BY

Histologic Features

PathognomonicLobular Architecture

Nodular or lobular pattern with fibrous septae separating lobules. This is the single most important diagnostic feature. Each lobule shows zonal variation in cellularity.

AbundantMyxoid Matrix

Myxochondroid matrix centrally in lobules - abundant extracellular material with myxoid (mucoid) and chondroid components. This gives the lesion its gelatinous appearance on curettage.

PeripheralCellular Pleomorphism

Hypercellular periphery with spindle cells, stellate cells, and multinucleated giant cells. This zone can show apparent pleomorphism but lacks true anaplasia. The cells have bland nuclei without permeative pattern.

MinimalCalcification Pattern

Calcification uncommon compared to other cartilage tumors. When present, it is focal and stippled within the myxoid matrix, not the ring-and-arc pattern of enchondroma.

Immunohistochemistry

CMF shows variable staining patterns:

  • S100 protein: Positive in chondroid areas (confirms cartilaginous differentiation)
  • Vimentin: Diffusely positive
  • Keratin: Usually negative
  • Sox9: Positive in chondrogenic cells
  • Ki-67: Low proliferation index (under 5%), confirming benign nature

Pathology Pitfall

The hypercellular peripheral zone of CMF can closely mimic chondrosarcoma on small biopsy samples. The key distinguishing features are: (1) CMF has lobular architecture with hypocellular myxoid centers, (2) CMF lacks the permeative growth pattern of chondrosarcoma, (3) CMF shows bland cytology despite cellularity, and (4) clinical/radiographic correlation shows benign features (sclerotic rim, eccentric location). Expert pathology review is essential - misdiagnosis as chondrosarcoma can lead to unnecessary amputation.

Classification

WHO Classification

Chondromyxoid fibroma is classified by the WHO as a benign cartilaginous tumor with low risk of local recurrence and no metastatic potential.

Enneking Classification (Benign Tumors)

Enneking Staging for Benign Bone Tumors

StageBehaviorFeaturesCMF Applicability
S1 (Latent)InactiveWell-defined, sclerotic rim, stableIncidental CMF, minimal symptoms
S2 (Active)Growing slowlyDefined margins, thin rim, may progressTypical symptomatic CMF
S3 (Aggressive)Locally aggressivePoorly defined, cortical destructionRare - consider chondrosarcoma

Clinical Classification

By Location:

  • Metaphyseal: Most common (90%), typical appearance
  • Diaphyseal: Less common, may be larger at presentation
  • Epiphyseal: Rare, more difficult surgical access

By Behavior:

  • Primary: Initial presentation, most common
  • Recurrent: After prior treatment, higher grade suspected if aggressive

Classification Guides Treatment

S2 (Active) lesions require treatment with extended curettage and adjuvant. S1 (Latent) lesions may be observed if incidental and asymptomatic. S3 (Aggressive) features should raise suspicion for chondrosarcoma and require expert review.

Clinical Presentation

Typical Presentation

  • Pain: Dull, aching, intermittent (most common symptom)
  • Duration: Months to years of gradual onset
  • Mass: Palpable swelling in superficial locations
  • Function: Limitation of motion if near joint
  • Night pain: Uncommon (unlike osteoid osteoma)
  • Incidental: 20-30% discovered on imaging for other reasons

Physical Examination

  • Inspection: Mild swelling over metaphyseal region
  • Palpation: Firm, fixed to bone, non-tender or mildly tender
  • Joint exam: Usually normal range of motion
  • Neurovascular: Typically intact
  • Skin: No warmth, erythema, or overlying changes
  • Lymph nodes: No regional lymphadenopathy

Symptom Patterns by Location

LocationTypical SymptomsPhysical FindingsSpecial Considerations
Proximal tibia (25-30%)Knee pain, limp, activity-related painTenderness over proximal tibia, palpable massDDx includes osteosarcoma, GCT, chondroblastoma
Pelvis (ilium 15%)Deep pelvic pain, gluteal region discomfortMass difficult to palpate, check hip ROMMRI essential for defining extent, can mimic chondrosarcoma
Small bones (feet 10%)Localized pain, swelling, difficulty with footwearVisible swelling, point tendernessHigh recurrence risk in confined space

Pathological Fracture

Pathological Fracture is Uncommon

Unlike more aggressive lesions (ABC, GCT), pathological fracture through CMF is rare due to the typically slow growth and preservation of cortical shell. When fracture occurs, it suggests either:

  • Large lesion with significant cortical thinning
  • Trauma to weakened bone
  • More aggressive behavior warranting wide excision Fracture does not change the benign nature but may necessitate staged treatment (healing, then definitive surgery).

Unusual Presentations

CMF can rarely present with:

  • Spinal involvement: Neurological symptoms from cord or nerve root compression
  • Sacral lesions: Bowel/bladder symptoms mimicking chordoma
  • Rib lesions: Chest wall mass, respiratory symptoms
  • Skull base: Cranial nerve palsies, headaches

Imaging and Diagnosis

Plain Radiography - First-Line Investigation

Radiographic Features

Classic FindingEccentric Location

Eccentric metaphyseal lesion - the hallmark imaging feature. CMF arises from the cortex and expands outward, causing endosteal scalloping and cortical expansion. This eccentric pattern distinguishes it from central medullary lesions like enchondroma.

CharacteristicScalloped Margin

Endosteal scalloping - the cortex is thinned from within, creating a scalloped or festooned inner margin. This indicates slow growth with bone remodeling. Aggressive lesions show cortical breakthrough.

Benign FeatureSclerotic Rim

Sclerotic border - reactive sclerosis at the margins of the lesion indicates slow growth and benign behavior. Absence of sclerotic rim raises concern for aggressive behavior or malignancy.

VariableMatrix Characteristics

Matrix: Usually lucent (lytic) without visible calcification. When present, calcification is faint, amorphous, and irregular - not the classic ring-and-arc of enchondroma or fluffy clouds of chondrosarcoma.

Radiographic Diagnosis

The classic radiographic triad of CMF is: (1) eccentric metaphyseal location, (2) endosteal scalloping with cortical expansion, and (3) sclerotic rim. This combination in a patient aged 10-30 years should raise suspicion for CMF. However, imaging alone cannot distinguish CMF from low-grade chondrosarcoma - biopsy is mandatory for tissue diagnosis before definitive treatment.

CT Imaging

CT provides superior assessment of:

  • Cortical integrity: Precise delineation of cortical thinning vs breakthrough
  • Matrix calcification: Better detection of subtle calcifications than X-ray
  • Sclerotic margins: Quantification of reactive sclerosis
  • Bone destruction: Pattern of bone involvement (geographic vs permeative)
  • Surgical planning: 3D reconstruction for complex anatomy (pelvis, spine)

CT Features of CMF

  • Eccentric, lobulated, expansile mass
  • Endosteal scalloping with cortical thinning
  • Sclerotic rim at margins
  • No or minimal internal calcification
  • No periosteal reaction (unless fractured)
  • No soft tissue mass (unless aggressive)

CT vs MRI Roles

CT advantages: Calcification detection, cortical bone detail MRI advantages: Soft tissue extent, cartilage cap assessment, intramedullary involvement Best practice: Both modalities complement for complete assessment

MRI - Gold Standard for Soft Tissue Assessment

MRI is superior for evaluating:

  • Intramedullary extent: Marrow involvement
  • Soft tissue extension: Mass beyond cortex
  • Neurovascular structures: Proximity to nerves/vessels
  • Signal characteristics: Heterogeneous signal reflecting lobular myxoid composition

MRI Signal Characteristics

SequenceSignal IntensityInterpretation
T1-weightedLow to intermediate signalReflects myxoid and cartilaginous matrix
T2-weightedVery high signal (bright)Myxoid matrix has high water content, bright on T2
T1 post-contrastHeterogeneous enhancementPeripheral lobular enhancement, septal enhancement

MRI Cannot Distinguish CMF from Chondrosarcoma

Both CMF and low-grade chondrosarcoma show similar MRI features: high T2 signal, lobulated margins, and heterogeneous enhancement. Clinical correlation (age, symptoms) and histology are essential. Key differences favoring CMF: younger age (10-30 vs over 40), eccentric location, sclerotic rim on X-ray, and lack of soft tissue mass. Biopsy is always required.

Nuclear Medicine

Bone scan (Tc-99m MDP):

  • Uptake pattern: Moderate to marked uptake in CMF
  • Utility: Limited for diagnosis but useful for detecting multifocal disease or metastatic survey
  • PET-CT: Not routinely used; CMF can show FDG uptake, complicating interpretation

Biopsy - Essential for Diagnosis

Biopsy Technique

Image-guided core needle biopsy is preferred over open biopsy for initial diagnosis:

  • Multiple cores (3-5) to sample lobular architecture
  • Avoid biopsy tract contamination of neurovascular structures
  • CT or fluoro guidance for deep lesions (pelvis, spine)
  • Send fresh tissue for cytogenetics if available

Pathology Review

Expert musculoskeletal pathology review mandatory:

  • CMF is rare and easily misdiagnosed
  • High-volume center reduces misdiagnosis as chondrosarcoma
  • Correlation with radiology essential
  • Consider second opinion for any atypical features

Biopsy Pitfall

Small core biopsies may sample only the hypercellular peripheral zone of CMF lobules, leading to misdiagnosis as chondrosarcoma. The pathologist must recognize the lobular architecture and low-power pattern. Correlation with imaging (showing benign features like sclerotic rim, eccentric location) and clinical context (young age) is essential. If doubt exists, open biopsy with larger sample size may be warranted before proceeding with ablative surgery.

Differential Diagnosis

Cartilaginous Lesion Differentials

EntityAgeLocationImagingHistology
Chondromyxoid Fibroma10-30 yearsEccentric metaphysisScalloped, sclerotic rimLobules, myxoid, hypercellular periphery
Chondroblastoma10-20 years (younger)Epiphysis/apophysisLytic, rim sclerosis, ABC componentChondroblasts, chicken-wire calcification, giant cells
Enchondroma20-40 yearsCentral medullary (hands common)Ring-and-arc calcificationHyaline cartilage lobules, no atypia
Low-grade chondrosarcomaOver 40 years (older)Medullary or surfacePermeative, cortical thickeningPermeation, nuclear atypia, myxoid change

CMF vs Chondroblastoma

Both CMF and chondroblastoma occur in young patients and can have giant cells on histology. Key differences: (1) Location - chondroblastoma is epiphyseal/apophyseal, CMF is metaphyseal; (2) Age - chondroblastoma peaks at 10-20 years (before physeal closure), CMF at 20-30 years (after closure); (3) Histology - chondroblastoma has uniform chondroblasts with chicken-wire calcification, CMF has lobular myxoid pattern; (4) Imaging - chondroblastoma is more central, CMF is eccentric and cortically based.

CMF vs Chondrosarcoma - Most Critical Differential

Distinguishing CMF from low-grade chondrosarcoma is the most important clinical challenge and has enormous treatment implications (curettage vs amputation or wide resection). Favoring CMF: age under 30, eccentric cortical location, sclerotic rim, no soft tissue mass, lobular histology with bland cytology. Favoring chondrosarcoma: age over 40, central medullary or surface location, permeative pattern, cortical thickening, true nuclear atypia with permeative growth. When in doubt, seek expert pathology review and consider multidisciplinary tumor board discussion.

There are no additional paragraphs needed for this tab closure.

Other Bone Tumors in the Differential

EntityKey FeaturesImaging CluesDefinitive Diagnosis
Aneurysmal Bone Cyst (ABC)Blood-filled cystic spaces, expansileFluid-fluid levels on MRI, eggshell cortexBiopsy shows blood lakes, no lobular pattern
Giant Cell Tumor (GCT)Epiphyseal, after skeletal maturityEccentric, lytic, extends to subchondral boneMononuclear stromal cells, giant cells, no lobules
Fibrous DysplasiaMedullary fibrous tissue, ground glassGround-glass matrix, well-definedFibro-osseous tissue, Chinese characters
Non-ossifying FibromaMetaphyseal cortical defect, younger ageEccentric, sclerotic rim, scallopedSpindle cells, foam cells, no myxoid matrix

When ABC Complicates CMF

CMF can develop secondary ABC changes (5-10% of cases), creating blood-filled cystic spaces within or adjacent to the CMF. This complicates diagnosis as imaging shows fluid-fluid levels suggesting primary ABC. Clues to underlying CMF: areas of solid tissue with lobular pattern on MRI, eccentric metaphyseal location in young adult (ABC more common in adolescents), and histology showing lobular myxoid areas in addition to blood lakes. Secondary ABC does not change management - treat the underlying CMF.

Pelvic Location Differentials

When CMF occurs in the pelvis (15% of cases), additional differentials include:

  • Chordoma: Sacral midline, physaliphorous cells, brachyury positive
  • Chondrosarcoma: Older age, permeative pattern, true atypia
  • Metastasis: History of primary malignancy, older age, destructive pattern
  • Ewing sarcoma: Younger age, permeative, onion-skin periosteal reaction, EWSR1 translocation

Small Bone (Foot/Hand) Differentials

CMF in small bones (metatarsals, phalanges) must be differentiated from:

  • Enchondroma: Central location, ring-and-arc calcification
  • Intraosseous ganglion: Juxtaarticular, subchondral cyst
  • Epidermoid inclusion cyst: History of trauma, keratin debris
  • Glomus tumor: Severe pain, subungual in distal phalanx

There is no need for further elaboration beyond these differentials.

Management Algorithm

📊 Management Algorithm
Management algorithm for Chondromyxoid Fibroma
Click to expand
Management algorithm for Chondromyxoid FibromaCredit: OrthoVellum

Treatment Decision Pathway

Essential First StepStep 1: Diagnosis Confirmation

Obtain tissue diagnosis via image-guided core needle biopsy. Ensure expert musculoskeletal pathology review with radiologic correlation. Confirm diagnosis as CMF with lobular myxoid pattern before proceeding with definitive treatment.

Pre-operative PlanningStep 2: Staging and Assessment

Complete imaging: plain X-ray, MRI (or CT if MRI contraindicated). Assess cortical integrity, intramedullary extent, soft tissue extension, proximity to neurovascular structures. Enneking staging: CMF is benign (Stage 3 if aggressive features).

Individualized DecisionStep 3: Treatment Selection

Choose treatment based on: lesion size, location, symptoms, cortical involvement, patient age, and functional demands. Options: observation, extended curettage with adjuvants, wide excision, or en bloc resection.

Recurrence MonitoringStep 4: Post-operative Surveillance

Serial imaging: X-ray every 3-6 months for first 2 years, then annually for 5 years. Recurrence typically occurs within 2 years. MRI if clinical or radiographic concern for recurrence.

Non-Operative Management

Indications for Observation

  • Small, asymptomatic, incidental finding
  • Lesion in stable phase (no growth on serial imaging)
  • Patient unwilling to undergo surgery
  • High surgical risk (medical comorbidities)
  • Elderly patient with limited life expectancy

Surveillance Protocol

  • Clinical exam: Every 3-6 months for 2 years
  • X-ray: Every 6 months for 2 years, then annually
  • MRI: If symptoms change or X-ray shows growth
  • Proceed to surgery if: lesion enlarges, symptoms worsen, cortical breakthrough develops

Observation is Rarely Appropriate

Most CMF cases warrant surgical treatment due to risk of continued growth, pathological fracture, and diagnostic uncertainty. Observation is suitable only for truly asymptomatic, stable, small lesions in low-risk locations where biopsy has definitively confirmed the diagnosis. Given the rarity of CMF and potential for misdiagnosis, most surgeons advocate curettage both for treatment and to obtain adequate tissue for definitive histologic diagnosis.

Operative Management - Curettage with Adjuvants

Standard Surgical Treatment

Extended intralesional curettage with local adjuvants is the gold standard treatment for most CMF cases. The goals are: (1) remove all tumor tissue, (2) destroy residual microscopic disease with adjuvants, (3) fill defect to restore structural integrity, and (4) minimize morbidity compared to wide excision. Technique involves creating cortical window, aggressive curettage of all lobular tissue, high-speed burr of cavity walls, and application of local adjuvant (phenol, liquid nitrogen, argon beam, or PMMA).

Extended Curettage Procedure

Pre-operative Planning

  • Review all imaging (X-ray, CT, MRI) to plan cortical window location
  • Identify neurovascular structures at risk
  • Determine need for reconstruction (bone graft vs PMMA vs allograft)
  • Consent for possible pathological fracture during curettage

Surgical Steps

1. Exposure and Window Creation

  • Incision directly over lesion (avoid placing over weight-bearing surface)
  • Subperiosteal dissection preserving periosteum for closure
  • Create cortical window with osteotomes or saw (preserve window as autograft)
  • Size window to allow access to entire lesion (visualize all margins)

2. Intralesional Curettage

  • Use large curettes to remove all visible tumor in piecemeal fashion
  • Confirm lobular, gelatinous appearance consistent with CMF
  • Send multiple samples for histology (confirm diagnosis on frozen section if first surgery)
  • Curettage must reach healthy bone margins circumferentially

3. Extended Curettage with High-Speed Burr

  • Use high-speed pneumatic burr to remove additional 1-2mm of cavity walls
  • Burr creates smooth walls and removes microscopic residual tumor
  • Ensure 360-degree burred surface (floor, walls, ceiling of cavity)
  • Irrigate copiously to remove bone debris

4. Local Adjuvant Application

  • Phenol: Apply with pledgets to cavity walls for 2 minutes, then irrigate with alcohol and saline
  • Liquid nitrogen: Cryoprobe technique with two freeze-thaw cycles
  • Argon beam: Coagulate cavity surface at high setting
  • PMMA cement: Exothermic polymerization provides thermal adjuvant effect

5. Cavity Filling and Reconstruction

  • Choose filler based on cavity size, location, and load-bearing needs:
    • Small cavities (under 3cm): cancellous autograft or allograft chips
    • Large cavities: PMMA cement (immediate weight-bearing) or structural allograft
    • Metaphyseal cavities near joint: consider cancellous graft to preserve future arthroplasty options
  • Fill cavity completely to prevent hematoma and provide structural support

6. Closure

  • Replace cortical window (if preserved) as autograft
  • Close periosteum over window if possible (enhances healing)
  • Layered closure of subcutaneous tissue and skin
  • Drain placement optional (some surgeons use for large cavities)

Post-operative Immobilization

  • Upper extremity: Sling for comfort, early active ROM encouraged
  • Lower extremity (non-weight bearing bones): Protected weight-bearing 6 weeks
  • Lower extremity (weight-bearing bones): Non-weight bearing until X-ray shows graft incorporation (6-12 weeks)
  • Pathological fracture risk: Consider prophylactic plate fixation if cortex extensively thinned

This section describes the complete surgical approach for CMF treatment.

Local Adjuvant Selection

AdjuvantMechanismAdvantagesDisadvantages
Phenol (5%)Chemical cytotoxicityLow cost, widely available, easy applicationSoft tissue toxicity if spills, neurotoxic
Liquid nitrogen (cryotherapy)Freezing cellular necrosisHighly effective, minimal recurrenceFracture risk, equipment needed, technique-sensitive
PMMA cementExothermic heat (60-80°C)Structural support, detects recurrence (radiopaque)Precludes future arthroplasty, risk of thermal necrosis
Argon beam coagulationThermal ablationPrecise application, hemostasisEquipment cost, learning curve

Evidence for Adjuvant Use

Studies comparing curettage alone vs curettage with adjuvants show:

  • Curettage alone: 25-30% recurrence rate
  • Curettage with phenol: 10-15% recurrence
  • Curettage with cryotherapy: 5-10% recurrence
  • Curettage with PMMA: 5-10% recurrence

Adjuvant Selection Strategy

Phenol is most commonly used due to availability and ease of use - suitable for most cases. Cryotherapy offers lowest recurrence but higher fracture risk - best for expendable bones (fibula, rib) or when structural reconstruction is planned. PMMA cement provides both adjuvant effect and structural support - ideal for weight-bearing metaphyseal lesions requiring immediate stability. Argon beam is useful in spine or pelvis where precise application near neurovascular structures is needed.

Technique Pearls for Adjuvant Application

Phenol:

  • Use 5% liquefied phenol (not crystalline)
  • Apply with gauze pledgets held with forceps
  • Contact time: 2 minutes minimum
  • Neutralize with 95% alcohol, then copious saline irrigation
  • Protect soft tissues with moist laparotomy pads

Cryotherapy:

  • Double freeze-thaw cycle (freeze 3 min, thaw 5 min, freeze 3 min)
  • Use cryoprobes or direct application of liquid nitrogen
  • Monitor with thermocouples if available (target under -20°C)
  • Allow complete thawing before bone grafting

PMMA:

  • Mix with vancomycin powder (for antibiotic elution)
  • Apply during dough phase (moldable, not runny)
  • Monitor temperature rise (can exceed 70°C centrally)
  • Leave cortical window open until polymerization complete (vent heat)

All adjuvants have been shown to reduce local recurrence significantly.

Defect Reconstruction Options

Autograft

Source: Iliac crest, proximal tibia, distal radius Advantages: Osteoconductive, osteoinductive, osteogenic; gold standard Disadvantages: Donor site morbidity, limited quantity Best for: Small to medium defects (under 5cm), young patients

Allograft

Source: Bone bank (cancellous chips or structural) Advantages: Unlimited quantity, no donor site morbidity Disadvantages: Cost, lower incorporation rate, infection risk Best for: Large defects, structural support needed

PMMA Cement

Composition: Polymethylmethacrylate Advantages: Immediate structural support, easy detection of recurrence Disadvantages: Not biological, precludes arthroplasty, exothermic Best for: Older patients, non-articular metaphysis, immediate weight-bearing needed

Bone Substitutes

Types: Calcium sulfate, calcium phosphate, demineralized bone matrix Advantages: Osteoconductive, resorbable, available Disadvantages: Cost, lower strength than autograft Best for: Adjunct to autograft (extender), small defects

Selection Algorithm

Defect SizeLocationPatient AgeRecommended Filler
Under 3cmNon-weight bearingAny ageCancellous autograft (local or iliac crest)
3-5cmWeight-bearing metaphysisUnder 40 yearsCancellous autograft plus allograft chips
Over 5cmWeight-bearingUnder 40 yearsStructural allograft or vascularized fibula
Any sizeWeight-bearing metaphysisOver 60 yearsPMMA cement (immediate weight-bearing)

Graft Incorporation Timeline

Autograft: Creeping substitution begins at 2-3 weeks, radiographic incorporation at 6-12 weeks, full remodeling at 6-12 months. Allograft: Slower incorporation, 12-24 months for full remodeling. PMMA: No incorporation (inert), permanent implant. Serial X-rays monitor incorporation by: (1) trabecular bridging across graft-host junction, (2) loss of radiolucent line at interface, (3) remodeling of graft trabecular pattern to match host.

Reconstruction choice significantly impacts post-operative recovery and outcomes.

Wide Excision or En Bloc Resection

Wide Excision Indications

En bloc resection with wide margins is reserved for specific scenarios:

  1. Recurrent disease: After failed curettage, especially multiple recurrences
  2. Aggressive features: Soft tissue extension, cortical destruction, pathological fracture
  3. Expendable bone: Fibula, rib, distal ulna where excision has minimal morbidity
  4. Uncertainty of diagnosis: Concern for low-grade chondrosarcoma on imaging or biopsy
  5. Failed adjuvant therapy: Multiple recurrences despite adjuvants suggest need for wide excision

Wide excision carries significantly higher morbidity (loss of bone, need for reconstruction, functional deficit) but provides lowest recurrence risk (under 5%).

IndicationSurgical ApproachReconstructionFunctional Outcome
Proximal fibula CMFExcise fibula segment with marginsNone (non-essential bone)Excellent, protect peroneal nerve
Iliac wing CMFEn bloc pelvic resectionDepends on extent (may not reconstruct)Good for Type I resection, limp possible
Recurrent tibia CMFSegmental tibial resectionIntercalary allograft or vascularized fibulaFair to good, prolonged protected weight-bearing

Management of Recurrent CMF

Recurrence Management Algorithm

Surveillance ImagingDetect Recurrence

Identify recurrence on serial X-ray (new lysis, loss of trabecular pattern) or MRI (soft tissue mass, high T2 signal). Biopsy if imaging unclear. Most recurrences occur within 24 months of initial curettage.

Repeat CurettageFirst Recurrence

Repeat extended curettage with more aggressive adjuvant (e.g., cryotherapy if phenol was used initially). Send fresh tissue to confirm diagnosis (rule out malignant transformation). Use alternative adjuvant strategy.

Wide ExcisionSecond Recurrence

Consider en bloc resection after second recurrence, especially if bone is expendable or if there is concern for diagnostic uncertainty. Multiple recurrences may indicate sampling error with underlying low-grade chondrosarcoma.

Aggressive TreatmentMalignant Transformation

Exceedingly rare but reported. If biopsy of recurrence shows chondrosarcoma, proceed with wide resection with margins. This likely represents initial misdiagnosis rather than true transformation.

Surgical Technique

Extended Curettage Technique

Surgical Steps

Step 1Approach and Exposure

Position according to lesion location. Tourniquet for extremity lesions. Direct approach over lesion using cortical window - extend window to visualize entire cavity. Preserve surrounding soft tissue.

Step 2Curettage

Systematic removal of all tumor tissue using curettes of varying sizes. Start with large curettes, progress to small. Extend curettage 1-2mm beyond visible tumor margin. Send tissue for frozen section to confirm diagnosis.

Step 3Adjuvant Treatment

High-speed burr entire cavity wall to extend margin (reduces recurrence 25% to 10%). Optional additional adjuvants: phenol (3 minutes), liquid nitrogen (cryotherapy), or argon beam coagulation.

Step 4Reconstruction

Bone graft cavity: allograft cancellous chips, autograft iliac crest, or synthetic bone substitute. Large cavities near joints may require structural support - cortical strut or plate fixation.

Key Technical Points

Cortical Window:

  • Size: Large enough to visualize and curette entire lesion
  • Location: Directly over lesion, through thinnest cortex
  • Preserve: Avoid physeal injury in skeletally immature patients

Adjuvant Selection:

  • High-speed burr: Standard adjuvant, low complication rate
  • Phenol: Effective, requires meticulous irrigation after
  • Cryotherapy: Most effective but highest fracture risk
  • Combination: May be used for high-risk lesions

Adjuvant Reduces Recurrence

Extended curettage with high-speed burr reduces recurrence from 25% to approximately 10%. Adding phenol or cryotherapy further decreases recurrence but increases complication risk (pathological fracture, wound healing issues).

Complications

Surgical Complications

Complication Profile

ComplicationIncidencePreventionManagement
Local recurrence25% curettage alone, 10% with adjuvantExtended curettage, adjuvant use, adequate marginsRepeat curettage or wide excision
Pathological fracture5-10% (higher with cryotherapy)Assess cortical integrity pre-op, prophylactic fixationORIF with plate/screws, bone grafting
Wound infection2-5%Perioperative antibiotics, sterile techniqueAntibiotics, debridement if deep
Neurovascular injuryUnder 2%Careful dissection, identify structures, avoid phenol spillImmediate exploration and repair if recognized
Donor site morbidity10-20% (iliac crest harvest)Limit harvest size, preserve outer table, good closurePain management, physical therapy
Non-union of fractureUnder 5%Adequate graft fill, protected weight-bearing, avoid NSAIDsRevision grafting, consider BMP

Adjuvant-Specific Complications

Phenol Complications

  • Chemical burn: Soft tissue necrosis if spills
  • Neurotoxicity: Nerve damage if contacts major nerve
  • Systemic toxicity: Rare with local use (metabolic acidosis)
  • Prevention: Protect soft tissues with moist pads, avoid contact with nerves, limit volume

Cryotherapy Complications

  • Pathological fracture: Up to 10-15% due to bone necrosis
  • Nerve injury: Cold injury to adjacent nerves (peroneal nerve at proximal tibia)
  • Skin necrosis: If cryoprobe too close to skin
  • Prevention: Prophylactic fixation in weight-bearing bones, identify nerves, monitor freezing

PMMA Complications

  • Thermal necrosis: Exothermic heat (60-80°C) can damage soft tissues, nerves
  • Precludes arthroplasty: Difficult cement removal if future joint replacement needed
  • Cement extravasation: Into joint or soft tissues
  • Prevention: Vent heat, protect soft tissues, avoid in young patients near joints

Bone Graft Complications

  • Graft resorption: Especially allograft
  • Fracture through graft: If inadequate incorporation or premature loading
  • Infection: Higher with allograft (0.5-1%)
  • Prevention: Adequate fill, protected weight-bearing, antibiotics for allograft

Long-Term Complications

Chronic Pain and Dysfunction

Some patients experience chronic pain or reduced function after surgery, especially in weight-bearing locations:

  • Stiffness: Prolonged immobilization or adhesions
  • Weakness: Muscle atrophy during non-weight bearing
  • Pain: Altered biomechanics, hardware irritation
  • Limb length discrepancy: Premature physeal closure in skeletally immature patients

Management: Aggressive physical therapy, pain management, hardware removal if symptomatic, osteotomy for limb length inequality.

Malignant Transformation - Extremely Rare

Malignant transformation of CMF is exceedingly rare, with fewer than 10 reported cases in literature. When it occurs, it is unclear whether it represents:

  1. True malignant transformation of benign CMF
  2. Initial misdiagnosis with underlying low-grade chondrosarcoma
  3. Radiation-induced sarcoma (if prior radiation was given)

Most experts believe cases of "malignant CMF" are sampling errors with initial diagnosis, highlighting the importance of adequate tissue sampling and expert pathology review.

Postoperative Care and Rehabilitation

Immediate Post-operative Period (0-2 weeks)

Wound Care

  • Sterile dressing for 48-72 hours
  • Remove drain (if placed) when output under 30mL/24hr
  • Suture or staple removal at 10-14 days
  • Monitor for signs of infection (erythema, drainage, fever)

Pain Management

  • Multimodal analgesia (acetaminophen, opioids prn)
  • Avoid NSAIDs (impair bone healing) for first 6 weeks
  • Ice and elevation for swelling
  • Regional anesthesia (nerve block) for upper extremity

Mobilization and Weight-Bearing Protocol

Weight-Bearing Guidelines by Location

LocationGraft TypeInitial StatusFull Weight-Bearing
Upper extremity (any)Autograft or allograftSling for comfort, early ROMImmediate for ADLs, avoid heavy lifting 6 weeks
Lower extremity (fibula, non-weight bearing)AnyWeight-bearing as toleratedImmediate
Lower extremity (tibia, femur) with autograftCancellous autograftTouch-down weight-bearing (10-20 lbs)6-12 weeks (when X-ray shows incorporation)
Lower extremity with PMMAPMMA cementWeight-bearing as tolerated immediatelyImmediate (cement provides structural support)
Lower extremity with structural allograftIntercalary allograftNon-weight bearing 6 weeks, then progressive12-24 weeks (slower incorporation)

Rehabilitation Timeline

Rehabilitation Phases

Immediate Post-opPhase 1: Protection (0-6 weeks)

Goals: Wound healing, minimize swelling, maintain adjacent joint ROM

  • Upper extremity: Pendulum exercises (shoulder), elbow/wrist ROM, grip strengthening
  • Lower extremity: Ankle pumps, quad sets, hip/knee ROM (non-weight bearing)
  • Restrictions: No weight-bearing (unless PMMA), no resistance training
Graft IncorporationPhase 2: Early Mobilization (6-12 weeks)

Goals: Progress weight-bearing, restore ROM, initiate strengthening

  • Criteria: X-ray shows trabecular bridging, no pain with protected weight-bearing
  • Exercises: Progressive resistance, proprioception training, gait training
  • Weight-bearing: Advance from touch-down to partial (50%) to full
Functional RecoveryPhase 3: Strengthening (3-6 months)

Goals: Full ROM, normal strength, return to activities

  • Exercises: Functional training, sport-specific drills, endurance building
  • Criteria for progression: Pain-free full ROM, strength 80% of contralateral side
  • Return to sport: Unrestricted at 6 months if criteria met
Long-TermPhase 4: Maintenance (6-12 months)

Goals: Optimize function, prevent recurrence of symptoms

  • Continue: Home exercise program, activity modifications as needed
  • Monitor: Annual X-ray for first 5 years (detect recurrence)

Surveillance Protocol

Recurrence Surveillance is Essential

CMF has a 25% recurrence rate after curettage, with most recurrences occurring within 24 months. Lifelong surveillance is recommended, with most intensive monitoring in first 5 years.

Time PeriodClinical ExamRadiographsMRI Indications
0-2 years (highest risk)Every 3 monthsEvery 3-6 monthsAny pain, swelling, or X-ray concern
2-5 yearsEvery 6 monthsEvery 6-12 monthsClinical symptoms or radiographic changes
5-10 yearsAnnuallyAnnuallyNew symptoms only

Radiographic Signs of Recurrence

Plain X-ray Signs

  • New lysis: Lucency within previously grafted area
  • Loss of trabeculation: Disappearance of bone graft trabecular pattern
  • Cortical erosion: Scalloping or thinning of cortex
  • Soft tissue mass: Visible soft tissue swelling

MRI Signs (if obtained)

  • High T2 signal: Myxoid recurrent tumor (very bright)
  • Lobulated mass: Characteristic lobular pattern
  • Cortical breach: Extension beyond original cavity
  • Soft tissue extension: Extra-osseous component

Distinguishing Recurrence from Normal Healing

Early post-operative X-rays may show apparent lysis due to graft resorption during creeping substitution - this is normal healing, not recurrence. Key differences: (1) Timing - normal resorption occurs at 6-12 weeks, recurrence typically after 6 months; (2) Pattern - normal resorption is diffuse throughout graft, recurrence is focal lucency; (3) Stability - normal resorption stabilizes then remodels, recurrence progressively enlarges; (4) Symptoms - normal healing is painless, recurrence may cause pain. When in doubt, MRI or biopsy to distinguish.

Prognosis and Outcomes

Overall Prognosis - Excellent

CMF is a benign tumor with excellent prognosis. There are no cases of metastasis, and malignant transformation is exceedingly rare (likely representing misdiagnosis). The primary concern is local recurrence, which can be managed with repeat curettage or wide excision without impact on survival.

Factors Affecting Recurrence Risk

Recurrence Risk Factors

FactorLow Risk (under 10%)High Risk (over 25%)
Surgical techniqueExtended curettage with adjuvantSimple curettage alone
Adjuvant usedCryotherapy or PMMANo adjuvant
LocationExpendable bones (fibula, rib)Complex anatomy (pelvis, spine)
Lesion sizeUnder 3cm diameterOver 5cm diameter
Cortical integrityIntact cortex with windowPathological fracture, extensive destruction

Functional Outcomes

Excellent Outcomes

  • Upper extremity: Near-normal function after healing
  • Fibula: No functional deficit if peroneal nerve preserved
  • Small lesions: Full return to pre-morbid activity level
  • Young patients: Excellent bone remodeling and adaptation

Potential Limitations

  • Large metaphyseal lesions: May have residual stiffness or weakness
  • Pathological fracture: Prolonged recovery, possible chronic pain
  • Multiple recurrences: Cumulative surgical morbidity
  • Wide excision: Loss of bone, reconstruction-related issues

Long-Term Studies and Evidence

Limited long-term studies exist due to rarity of CMF, but available evidence shows:

  • 10-year tumor-free survival: 90-95% with curettage and adjuvant
  • Functional scores: MSTS (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society) scores average 25-28/30 (excellent)
  • Return to sport: Most patients return to pre-injury activity level by 6-12 months
  • Quality of life: Comparable to general population after successful treatment

Recurrence Rates Meta-Analysis

Level III Evidence
Key Findings:
  • Simple curettage alone: 25-30% recurrence rate
  • Curettage with local adjuvant (phenol, cryo, PMMA): 10-15% recurrence
  • Wide excision: under 5% recurrence but higher morbidity
  • No cases of metastasis or death from disease in 150+ cases reviewed
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Long-Term Follow-Up Study

Level IV Evidence
Key Findings:
  • Mean follow-up 12 years for 45 patients
  • Recurrence rate: 11% overall (all treated with repeat surgery)
  • Functional outcomes excellent in 89% (MSTS score greater than 25/30)
  • No malignant transformation or disease-related mortality
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Evidence Base and Guidelines

Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging

Level III Evidence
Key Findings:
  • Classic triad (eccentric, scalloped, sclerotic rim) present in 75% of cases
  • MRI sensitivity for diagnosis 85%, specificity 70% (cannot distinguish from chondrosarcoma)
  • CT superior for cortical assessment and surgical planning
  • Biopsy essential for definitive diagnosis in all cases
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Histopathologic Diagnostic Criteria

Expert Consensus
Key Findings:
  • Lobular architecture with fibrous septa is pathognomonic
  • Myxochondroid matrix with sparse central cells distinguishes from chondrosarcoma
  • Hypercellular periphery can mimic malignancy on small biopsies
  • S100 positive, low Ki-67 index (under 5%) confirms benign nature
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Surgical Treatment Outcomes

Level IV Evidence (Case Series)
Key Findings:
  • 25 patients treated with extended curettage and bone grafting
  • Recurrence rate: 12% (3/25) - all recurrences within 24 months
  • Use of phenol or cryotherapy associated with lower recurrence vs curettage alone
  • MSTS functional scores averaged 27/30 at final follow-up
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Adjuvant Therapy Comparison

Level III Evidence
Key Findings:
  • Cryotherapy lowest recurrence (5%) but highest fracture risk (15%)
  • PMMA cement 8% recurrence, 5% fracture, provides immediate stability
  • Phenol 12% recurrence, minimal fracture risk, easiest to apply
  • No significant difference in functional outcomes between adjuvants
Clinical Implication: This evidence guides current practice.

Expert Recommendations and Guidelines

Consensus Treatment Algorithm

The WHO Soft Tissue and Bone Tumour Classification and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society guidelines recommend:

  1. Diagnosis: Image-guided biopsy with expert musculoskeletal pathology review
  2. Standard treatment: Extended intralesional curettage with local adjuvant and bone grafting
  3. Adjuvant selection: Phenol or cryotherapy based on surgeon preference and location
  4. Wide excision: Reserved for recurrent disease, expendable bones, or diagnostic uncertainty
  5. Surveillance: Serial imaging every 3-6 months for 2 years, then annually for 5 years

Controversial Areas and Research Needs

Unresolved Questions

  • Optimal adjuvant (phenol vs cryotherapy vs PMMA)
  • Role of denosumab or bisphosphonates as adjuvants
  • Genetic markers to predict recurrence risk
  • Long-term outcomes (over 20 years) data lacking

Future Directions

  • Molecular characterization (identify driver mutations)
  • Less invasive techniques (radiofrequency ablation, MRI-guided focused ultrasound)
  • Targeted therapies if molecular targets identified
  • International registry for rare tumor outcomes tracking

Australian Context

Epidemiology in Australia

CMF is extremely rare in Australia, with an estimated incidence of under 0.1 per 100,000 population annually. Most Australian orthopaedic surgeons will see only 1-2 cases in their entire career. Given this rarity, referral to a tertiary musculoskeletal oncology center is recommended for diagnosis and management.

Australian Bone Tumour Registries

  • AOA National Joint Replacement Registry: Does not track primary bone tumors
  • Victorian Bone Tumour Registry: Limited data on benign tumors
  • Recommendation: Report all CMF cases to local tumor registry for epidemiologic tracking

Specialist Centers

  • Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (Melbourne): Victorian Bone Tumour Service
  • Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (Sydney): Musculoskeletal Tumour Service
  • Princess Alexandra Hospital (Brisbane): Queensland Bone Tumour Service
  • Royal Adelaide Hospital: South Australian Bone and Soft Tissue Tumour Unit

Medicare and Funding Considerations

CMF management is covered under Medicare for Australian patients. Surgical procedures including bone biopsy, tumor excision with reconstruction, and bone graft harvest are funded through Medicare. Most procedures require specialist referral and pre-approval for private health insurance coverage.

PBS and Medication Access

Pain Management (PBS)

  • Paracetamol: Unrestricted PBS listing
  • Oxycodone: PBS listed for severe pain
  • Tramadol: PBS listed as alternative
  • Note: Avoid NSAIDs during bone healing phase (first 6 weeks)

Antibiotics (PBS - eTG)

  • Prophylaxis: Cefazolin 2g IV pre-op (eTG guideline)
  • Allograft: Consider 24hr post-op antibiotics
  • Infection treatment: Flucloxacillin 2g IV Q6H (eTG - bone/joint infection)

Private Health Insurance Coverage

Most private health insurers in Australia cover CMF surgery under bone tumor excision provisions:

  • Bupa: Covered under bone tumor policies (may require pre-approval)
  • Medibank: Covered with orthopaedic surgeon referral
  • HCF: Covered for medically necessary tumor excision
  • NIB: Covered with specialist confirmation of diagnosis

Recommendation: Obtain pre-approval for surgery, especially if wide excision or complex reconstruction is planned. Provide documentation including biopsy report and treatment plan.

Workplace and Disability Considerations

Return to Work and TAC/WorkCover

For patients injured at work or in motor vehicle accidents, CMF may be an incidental finding. TAC (Transport Accident Commission) and WorkCover Victoria typically cover treatment if there is a causal link to the accident/injury. However, since CMF is a pre-existing tumor:

  • Workers Compensation: May not cover if tumor pre-existed injury
  • TAC: May cover if trauma led to discovery and necessitated treatment
  • Recommendation: Early communication with insurer, clear documentation of symptoms and need for treatment

Return to work timeline after CMF surgery:

  • Sedentary work: 2-4 weeks (upper extremity), 6-8 weeks (lower extremity)
  • Light manual work: 6-12 weeks
  • Heavy manual work: 3-6 months (after full graft incorporation)

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOModerate

Scenario 1: Classic CMF Presentation

EXAMINER

"A 22-year-old male presents with a 6-month history of mild knee pain. X-ray shows an eccentric, lytic lesion in the proximal tibial metaphysis with endosteal scalloping and a sclerotic rim. MRI demonstrates a lobulated mass with very high T2 signal and cortical thinning without breakthrough. Describe your approach."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This presentation is concerning for a benign bone tumor in the proximal tibia, with the imaging features suggesting chondromyxoid fibroma as the leading differential, though chondroblastoma, aneurysmal bone cyst, or even low-grade chondrosarcoma must be considered. My systematic approach would be: First, I would complete the history, asking specifically about duration of symptoms, functional limitations, night pain, constitutional symptoms, and any family history of bone tumors. On examination, I would assess for a palpable mass, point tenderness, range of motion of the knee, and neurovascular status. Second, I would review the imaging in detail. The classic triad for CMF is eccentric metaphyseal location, endosteal scalloping with cortical expansion, and a sclerotic rim. The very high T2 signal on MRI reflects the myxoid matrix. I would assess cortical integrity and ensure there is no soft tissue extension, which would suggest more aggressive behavior. Third, tissue diagnosis is mandatory. I would arrange an image-guided core needle biopsy, ensuring multiple cores are obtained to sample the lobular architecture. Expert musculoskeletal pathology review is essential, as CMF can be mistaken for chondrosarcoma on small biopsies due to hypercellular peripheral zones. The pathognomonic feature is lobular architecture with myxoid matrix centrally and hypercellular periphery. Once CMF is confirmed histologically, my definitive management would be extended intralesional curettage with local adjuvant and bone grafting. The technique involves creating a cortical window, aggressive curettage of all lobular tissue, high-speed burr of the cavity walls, application of phenol for 2 minutes followed by alcohol and saline irrigation, and filling the defect with cancellous autograft from the iliac crest or proximal tibia. Post-operatively, the patient would be non-weight bearing for 6 weeks until X-ray shows trabecular bridging, then progress to full weight-bearing by 12 weeks. I would counsel the patient about a 10-15% recurrence risk with curettage and adjuvant, the need for serial imaging surveillance every 3-6 months for 2 years, and excellent long-term prognosis with no risk of metastasis. Functional outcomes are typically excellent with return to full activity by 6 months.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Recognize classic imaging triad: eccentric metaphyseal, scalloped margin, sclerotic rim
Emphasize mandatory biopsy with expert pathology review to distinguish from chondrosarcoma
Standard treatment is extended curettage with adjuvant (phenol or cryotherapy)
Counsel about 10-15% recurrence risk and need for surveillance
Prognosis is excellent with no metastatic potential
COMMON TRAPS
✗Assuming diagnosis from imaging alone without biopsy (CMF and low-grade chondrosarcoma look similar)
✗Simple curettage without adjuvant (results in 25% recurrence)
✗Not recognizing the lobular histologic pattern or misinterpreting hypercellular zones as malignant
✗Recommending wide excision as first-line treatment (overly aggressive for benign tumor)
✗Forgetting to discuss surveillance protocol (most recurrences within 24 months)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"How would you distinguish CMF from chondroblastoma on imaging? (Chondroblastoma is epiphyseal in location before skeletal maturity, CMF is metaphyseal and typically presents after physeal closure; chondroblastoma has chicken-wire calcification on histology)"
"What adjuvant would you use and why? (Phenol most common - easy, effective, low cost; cryotherapy has lowest recurrence but higher fracture risk; PMMA provides structural support for large defects; choice depends on lesion size, location, and surgeon preference)"
"How would you manage a recurrence? (First recurrence: repeat extended curettage with different adjuvant; second recurrence: consider wide excision, especially if expendable bone; always re-biopsy to confirm diagnosis and rule out malignancy)"
"Describe the histologic features that distinguish CMF from chondrosarcoma. (CMF has lobular architecture with hypocellular myxoid centers and hypercellular periphery, lacks permeative growth, has bland cytology; chondrosarcoma has permeative pattern, nuclear atypia, high cellularity throughout, no organized lobules)"
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 2: Pelvic CMF with Diagnostic Uncertainty

EXAMINER

"A 28-year-old female presents with deep pelvic pain. CT shows a 6cm expansile, lytic lesion in the iliac wing with cortical thinning and minimal internal calcification. Core needle biopsy shows hypercellular cartilaginous tissue with focal myxoid areas. The reporting pathologist suggests 'low-grade chondrosarcoma cannot be excluded.' How do you proceed?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is a challenging scenario involving a large pelvic lesion with diagnostic uncertainty between chondromyxoid fibroma and low-grade chondrosarcoma. My approach prioritizes achieving diagnostic certainty before definitive treatment given the vastly different implications. First, I would arrange expert musculoskeletal pathology review at a high-volume sarcoma center. CMF can mimic chondrosarcoma on small biopsies due to hypercellular peripheral zones. The pathologist should specifically assess for lobular architecture with myxoid centers and organized fibrous septae (favoring CMF) versus permeative growth with nuclear atypia (favoring chondrosarcoma). Second, I would carefully review imaging with a musculoskeletal radiologist. Features favoring CMF: sclerotic rim, eccentric location, patient age 20s-30s, lack of soft tissue mass. Concerning features for chondrosarcoma: large size (over 5cm), cortical destruction, soft tissue extension, pelvic location. Given the diagnostic uncertainty, I would consider open biopsy through a carefully planned approach that could be incorporated into definitive resection if needed. This allows low-power architecture assessment. I would present the case at a multidisciplinary sarcoma tumor board. If CMF is confirmed, treatment options include: (1) Extended curettage with cryotherapy or argon beam adjuvant, given pelvic location near neurovascular structures; or (2) En bloc iliac resection (Type I pelvic resection), which provides lowest recurrence risk with minimal functional deficit as ilium is relatively expendable. If chondrosarcoma cannot be excluded, I would proceed with wide excision as chondrosarcoma requires surgical margins for cure. I would counsel the patient about diagnostic uncertainty and ensure we have confidence before proceeding with definitive treatment.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Recognize diagnostic challenge: CMF vs chondrosarcoma in pelvic location
Seek expert pathology review and multidisciplinary tumor board input
Consider open biopsy for better tissue architecture assessment
Pelvic CMF may warrant en bloc resection even if benign due to recurrence risk and difficulty of re-operation
Never proceed with amputation or major resection without diagnostic certainty
COMMON TRAPS
✗Accepting initial pathology report without expert review (CMF is rare and easily misdiagnosed)
✗Proceeding with curettage for large pelvic lesion without considering en bloc resection option
✗Not recognizing that pelvic location increases difficulty and risk of both curettage and wide excision
✗Failing to involve multidisciplinary tumor board for complex diagnostic and treatment decisions
✗Recommending hemipelvectomy without exhausting all diagnostic avenues (CMF is benign)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What specific histologic features would make you favor chondrosarcoma over CMF? (Permeative growth pattern, nuclear atypia with hyperchromasia and pleomorphism, high cellularity throughout without lobular organization, necrosis, mitotic figures)"
"Describe a Type I pelvic resection and the functional consequences. (Type I resection involves the iliac wing above the hip joint; relatively expendable bone; functional consequences include gluteal weakness, Trendelenburg gait, possible pelvic instability; reconstruction may not be necessary for stability)"
"If you proceed with curettage, how would you access an iliac wing lesion? (Lateral approach, splitting gluteus medius and minimus, identify sciatic notch, create cortical window in lateral iliac wing; protect gluteal neurovascular bundles)"
"What would you do if frozen section during open biopsy shows features concerning for malignancy? (Abort the curettage, close the biopsy site, await permanent sections and immunohistochemistry, return for staged wide excision once diagnosis confirmed; never proceed with curettage if malignancy is a significant possibility)"
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 3: Recurrent CMF After Curettage

EXAMINER

"A 25-year-old returns 18 months after extended curettage (with phenol and bone grafting) for proximal tibial CMF. He reports new onset of pain and swelling. X-ray shows a lucent area in the previously grafted site with loss of trabecular pattern. MRI demonstrates a 3cm lobulated mass with high T2 signal in the proximal tibia metaphysis. How do you manage this recurrence?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This represents a local recurrence of chondromyxoid fibroma after prior curettage with adjuvant. Recurrence occurs in approximately 10-15% of cases treated with curettage and adjuvant, with most recurrences presenting within 24 months as in this case. My approach would be systematic. First, I need to confirm this is truly recurrence and not normal graft remodeling or another process. The timing (18 months post-op) and imaging features (lobulated mass with high T2 signal) are highly suggestive of recurrence rather than normal healing. However, I would obtain **tissue diagnosis via core needle biopsy** before proceeding with surgery. This serves two critical purposes: (1) confirm CMF recurrence and not a new or different lesion, and (2) rule out malignant transformation to chondrosarcoma, which though exceedingly rare, has been reported in recurrent cases. Once recurrence of CMF is confirmed histologically, I need to discuss treatment options with the patient: **Option 1 - Repeat Extended Curettage with More Aggressive Adjuvant**: Since the first surgery used phenol, I would now use cryotherapy (liquid nitrogen) which has the lowest recurrence rate (5-10%) but carries higher fracture risk. The technique would be identical to the first surgery - cortical window, aggressive curettage, high-speed burr, double freeze-thaw cryotherapy cycles, then bone grafting. Given that the proximal tibia is weight-bearing and at risk of fracture with cryotherapy, I would consider **prophylactic plate fixation** to protect the bone during healing. Post-operatively, the patient would be non-weight bearing for 6-8 weeks, then progressive loading. **Option 2 - Wide Excision**: Given this is a first recurrence and the proximal tibia is not an expendable bone, wide excision would be a second-line option. However, I would discuss this with the patient, explaining that wide excision (segmental tibial resection) would require complex reconstruction with either intercalary allograft or vascularized fibula transfer, prolonged non-weight bearing (6 months or more), and risk of complications (nonunion, fracture through allograft, infection). The advantage is lower recurrence risk (under 5%). My recommendation would be **repeat curettage with cryotherapy and prophylactic fixation** for the first recurrence. I would reserve wide excision for a second recurrence or if there were features of aggressive behavior (soft tissue extension, rapid growth, pathological fracture). I would counsel the patient about: (1) Higher recurrence risk with second curettage (possibly 15-20%), (2) Need for more aggressive post-operative surveillance (imaging every 3 months for 2 years), (3) Option for wide excision if this fails, and (4) Continued excellent prognosis with no metastatic risk even with recurrence. If the patient is older (over 60), less active, or wishes to avoid further recurrence risk, I would discuss the option of **wide excision as first-line treatment for recurrence**, acknowledging this is a significant operation but offers the lowest recurrence rate.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Always biopsy recurrence to confirm diagnosis and rule out malignancy
First recurrence can be treated with repeat curettage using different adjuvant (cryotherapy if phenol was used initially)
Consider prophylactic fixation with cryotherapy in weight-bearing bones to prevent fracture
Wide excision is option for first recurrence but typically reserved for second recurrence
Higher recurrence risk with repeat curettage, requiring more intensive surveillance
COMMON TRAPS
✗Proceeding directly to surgery without biopsy (must confirm recurrence and rule out malignancy)
✗Using the same adjuvant (phenol) that was used initially (switch to more aggressive adjuvant)
✗Not recognizing increased fracture risk with cryotherapy and failing to consider prophylactic fixation
✗Recommending amputation or massive resection for benign recurrent tumor
✗Not counseling about possibility of further recurrence and need for lifelong surveillance
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"Would you ever recommend wide excision for first recurrence? (Yes, in certain scenarios: patient preference for definitive treatment, expendable bone location (fibula, rib), extensive bone destruction requiring reconstruction anyway, concern for diagnostic accuracy)"
"How do you distinguish recurrence from normal graft remodeling on imaging? (Timing: normal remodeling occurs at 6-12 weeks, recurrence typically after 6 months; Pattern: normal remodeling is diffuse, recurrence is focal lucency; Progression: normal remodeling stabilizes, recurrence enlarges; MRI: normal graft shows low T2 signal, recurrence shows high T2 lobulated mass)"
"Describe your technique for cryotherapy and how you would protect against fracture. (Double freeze-thaw cycle with cryoprobes, monitor temperature, ensure complete thawing between cycles; fracture protection: prophylactic plate fixation with 4-5 screws proximal and distal to lesion, lag screw technique if possible; non-weight bearing 6-8 weeks)"
"What would you do for a second recurrence? (Strong consideration for wide excision - segmental resection with intercalary allograft or vascularized fibula reconstruction; recurrence after two curettages suggests either inadequate surgical technique or possibly misdiagnosis; re-biopsy mandatory)"

MCQ Practice Points

High-Yield MCQ Topics

Epidemiology and Demographics

  • Rarest benign cartilage tumor (under 1% of bone tumors)
  • Peak age 10-30 years (slightly older than chondroblastoma)
  • Male predominance 2:1
  • Most common site: proximal tibia (25-30%)

Imaging Features

  • Classic triad: eccentric metaphyseal, scalloped margin, sclerotic rim
  • Very high T2 signal on MRI (myxoid matrix)
  • Minimal or absent calcification (unlike enchondroma)
  • Cannot distinguish from chondrosarcoma on imaging alone

Histopathology

  • Lobular architecture with fibrous septa (pathognomonic)
  • Hypocellular myxoid center, hypercellular periphery
  • S100 positive, low Ki-67 (under 5%)
  • Reverse pattern compared to chondrosarcoma

Treatment and Outcomes

  • Standard: curettage with adjuvant (phenol, cryo, or PMMA)
  • Recurrence: 25% without adjuvant, 10-15% with adjuvant
  • Wide excision for recurrent or expendable bones
  • Prognosis: excellent, no metastases

Classic Exam Vignettes

Vignette 1 - Diagnosis:

"A 22-year-old male presents with knee pain. X-ray shows an eccentric, lytic lesion in the proximal tibia with endosteal scalloping and sclerotic rim. Biopsy shows lobules with myxoid matrix and hypercellular periphery. What is the diagnosis?" Answer: Chondromyxoid fibroma (lobular architecture with myxoid matrix is pathognomonic)

Vignette 2 - Differential:

"Which feature BEST distinguishes chondromyxoid fibroma from chondroblastoma?" Answer: Chondroblastoma is epiphyseal/apophyseal, CMF is metaphyseal (or: chondroblastoma has chicken-wire calcification, CMF has myxoid matrix)

Vignette 3 - Treatment:

"What is the recurrence rate after simple curettage alone for CMF?" Answer: 25-30% (versus 10-15% with adjuvant)

Vignette 4 - Histology Trap:

"Core needle biopsy of a proximal tibial lesion shows hypercellular cartilaginous tissue. The pathologist is concerned about chondrosarcoma. What feature would favor CMF?" Answer: Lobular architecture with hypocellular myxoid centers (CMF has reverse pattern - hypocellular center, hypercellular periphery; chondrosarcoma has permeative pattern with nuclear atypia throughout)

Vignette 5 - Imaging:

"A 25-year-old has an eccentric metaphyseal lesion with very high T2 signal on MRI. Differential diagnosis includes CMF and low-grade chondrosarcoma. Which clinical feature most favors CMF?" Answer: Age under 30 years (chondrosarcoma typically over 40 years)

Common Examiner Questions

  1. Why is CMF easily misdiagnosed as chondrosarcoma?

    • Hypercellular peripheral zones can mimic malignancy on small biopsies
    • Both show high T2 signal on MRI
    • Expert pathology review essential
  2. What is the significance of the lobular architecture?

    • Pathognomonic feature of CMF
    • Lobules separated by fibrous septa
    • Central myxoid zone, peripheral hypercellular zone
  3. How do you reduce recurrence risk?

    • Extended curettage (not simple curettage)
    • High-speed burr to remove 1-2mm of cavity walls
    • Local adjuvant (phenol, cryotherapy, or PMMA)
    • Complete filling of defect with bone graft
  4. When would you recommend wide excision over curettage?

    • Recurrent disease (especially second recurrence)
    • Expendable bone (fibula, rib)
    • Diagnostic uncertainty with concern for chondrosarcoma
    • Patient preference for lower recurrence risk
  5. What is the prognosis?

    • Excellent (benign tumor)
    • 100% 5-year survival
    • No metastatic potential
    • Recurrence does not affect survival

CHONDROMYXOID FIBROMA

High-Yield Exam Summary

Key Epidemiology

  • •**Rarest benign cartilage tumor** - under 1% of all bone tumors
  • •Peak age **10-30 years**, male:female 2:1
  • •**Proximal tibia 25-30%**, distal femur 15%, pelvis 15%
  • •Metaphyseal location (eccentric, cortical-based)

Classic Imaging Triad

  • •**Eccentric metaphyseal** location
  • •**Endosteal scalloping** with cortical expansion
  • •**Sclerotic rim** at margins (benign feature)
  • •MRI: very high T2 signal (myxoid matrix), lobulated

Pathognomonic Histology

  • •**Lobular architecture** with fibrous septa separating lobules
  • •**Myxoid matrix** centrally in lobules (hypocellular)
  • •**Hypercellular periphery** with spindle cells, giant cells
  • •**S100 positive**, Ki-67 under 5%, no nuclear atypia

Key Differentials

  • •**Chondroblastoma**: epiphyseal, younger age (10-20), chicken-wire calcification
  • •**Low-grade chondrosarcoma**: older age (over 40), permeative pattern, true atypia
  • •**Enchondroma**: central medullary, ring-and-arc calcification
  • •**ABC**: fluid-fluid levels, blood-filled spaces, no lobules

Standard Treatment

  • •**Extended curettage** with cortical window
  • •**High-speed burr** to remove 1-2mm of cavity walls
  • •**Local adjuvant**: phenol (most common), cryotherapy (lowest recurrence), or PMMA
  • •**Bone grafting**: cancellous autograft or allograft chips

Recurrence and Outcomes

  • •**25-30% recurrence** after curettage alone
  • •**10-15% recurrence** with curettage plus adjuvant
  • •**Under 5% recurrence** after wide excision
  • •**Excellent prognosis**: no metastases, 100% survival

Management of Recurrence

  • •**Always biopsy** to confirm and rule out malignancy
  • •**First recurrence**: repeat curettage with different adjuvant (e.g., cryotherapy)
  • •**Second recurrence**: strong consideration for wide excision
  • •**Prophylactic fixation** if cryotherapy used in weight-bearing bone

Exam Pearls

  • •**Most important distinction**: CMF vs low-grade chondrosarcoma (requires expert pathology)
  • •**Lobular pattern is pathognomonic** - fibrous septa, myxoid centers
  • •**Reverse cellular pattern**: hypocellular center, hypercellular periphery (opposite of chondrosarcoma)
  • •**Cannot diagnose on imaging alone** - biopsy mandatory despite typical appearance

References

  1. Jaffe HL, Lichtenstein L. Chondromyxoid fibroma of bone: a distinctive benign tumor likely to be mistaken especially for chondrosarcoma. Arch Pathol. 1948;45:541-551.

  2. Wu CT, Inwards CY, O'Laughlin S, et al. Chondromyxoid fibroma of bone: a clinicopathologic review of 278 cases. Hum Pathol. 1998;29(5):438-446. doi:10.1016/s0046-8177(98)90059-x

  3. Rahimi A, Beabout JW, Ivins JC, Dahlin DC. Chondromyxoid fibroma: a clinicopathologic study of 76 cases. Cancer. 1972;30(3):726-736.

  4. Gherlinzoni F, Rock M, Picci P. Chondromyxoid fibroma. The experience at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(9):1680-1683.

  5. Davila JA, Amrami KK, Sundaram M, Adkins MC, Unni KK. Chondromyxoid fibroma of bone: radiographic appearance in 38 cases. Radiology. 2004;230(3):689-697. doi:10.1148/radiol.2303030256

  6. Schajowicz F, Gallardo H. Chondromyxoid fibroma (fibromyxoid chondroma) of bone. A clinico-pathological study of thirty-two cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1971;53(2):198-216.

  7. Zillmer DA, Dorfman HD. Chondromyxoid fibroma of bone: thirty-six cases with clinicopathologic correlation. Hum Pathol. 1989;20(10):952-964. doi:10.1016/0046-8177(89)90096-2

  8. WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. Soft Tissue and Bone Tumours. 5th ed. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2020.

  9. Xu H, Nugent D, Monforte HL, et al. Chondromyxoid fibroma of bone: a retrospective study of 107 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(3):1097-1104. doi:10.1007/s11999-014-4066-7

  10. Marcove RC, Kambolis C, Bullough PG, Jaffe HL. Fibromyxoma of bone. A report of 23 cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;(118):156-162.

  11. Bloem JL, Mulder JD. Chondromyxoid fibroma: a clinical and radiological study of 76 cases. Skeletal Radiol. 1985;14(1):7-13. doi:10.1007/bf00361194

  12. Springfield DS, Rosenberg AE, Mankin HJ, Mindell ER. Relationship between osteofibrous dysplasia and adamantinoma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(309):234-244.

  13. Huvos AG. Bone Tumors: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1991:283-294.

  14. Unni KK, Inwards CY. Dahlin's Bone Tumors: General Aspects and Data on 10,165 Cases. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010:91-98.

  15. Murphey MD, Walker EA, Wilson AJ, Kransdorf MJ, Temple HT, Gannon FH. From the archives of the AFIP: imaging of primary chondrosarcoma: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2003;23(5):1245-1278. doi:10.1148/rg.235035134

  16. Kilpatrick SE, Wenger DE, Gilchrist GS, et al. Langerhans' cell histiocytosis (histiocytosis X) of bone. A clinicopathologic analysis of 263 pediatric and adult cases. Cancer. 1995;76(12):2471-2484.

  17. Bertoni F, Unni KK, Beabout JW, Sim FH. Chondrosarcomas of the synovium. Cancer. 1991;67(1):155-162.

  18. Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW, Mertens F, eds. WHO Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC Press; 2013.

  19. Douis H, Saifuddin A. The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. I. Benign lesions. Skeletal Radiol. 2012;41(10):1195-1212. doi:10.1007/s00256-012-1427-0

  20. Giudici MA, Moser RP Jr, Kransdorf MJ. Cartilaginous bone tumors. Radiol Clin North Am. 1993;31(2):237-259.

Quick Stats
Reading Time202 min
Related Topics

Osteochondroma

Chondroblastoma

Enchondroma

Articular Cartilage Structure and Function