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.

Ewing Sarcoma

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Ewing Sarcoma

Highly malignant small round cell bone tumor affecting children and adolescents, requiring multimodal treatment with chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation

complete
Updated: 2025-01-15
High Yield Overview

EWING SARCOMA

Small Round Cell Tumor | Second Most Common Pediatric Bone Malignancy | Multimodal Treatment Required

10-20peak age range (years)
70%5-year survival localized disease
25%present with metastases
90%involve diaphysis of long bones

ENNEKING STAGING

IB
PatternHigh-grade intracompartmental
TreatmentNeoadjuvant chemo + surgery
IIB
PatternHigh-grade extracompartmental
TreatmentNeoadjuvant chemo + wide excision
III
PatternMetastatic disease
TreatmentSystemic chemo + local control

Critical Must-Knows

  • Second most common primary bone malignancy in children (after osteosarcoma)
  • EWS-FLI1 translocation t(11;22) present in 85% - diagnostic hallmark
  • Onion-skin periosteal reaction classic radiographic finding
  • Multimodal treatment mandatory: chemotherapy + surgery ± radiation
  • Poor response to chemotherapy (under 90% necrosis) is worst prognostic factor

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Fever and elevated inflammatory markers mimic infection - biopsy essential
  • "
    VDC-IE protocol: Vincristine, Doxorubicin, Cyclophosphamide alternating with Ifosfamide, Etoposide
  • "
    Surgical margins more important than degree of necrosis for local control
  • "
    Metastases to lung, bone, bone marrow - whole-body staging required

Clinical Imaging

Ewing sarcoma of femoral diaphysis with treatment
Click to expand
Ewing sarcoma in a 26-year-old male. (A) AP femur X-ray showing permeative lytic lesion in the mid-diaphysis - classic location for Ewing sarcoma. (B) MRI demonstrating tumor extent with marrow involvement and soft tissue mass. (C) Resected specimen after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (D-E) Postoperative AP and lateral X-rays showing intercalary reconstruction with plate fixation. Limb salvage is possible in over 85% of extremity cases.Credit: Qu H et al., World J Surg Oncol - CC-BY

Critical Ewing Sarcoma Exam Points

Diagnostic Hallmark

t(11;22) translocation creating EWS-FLI1 fusion. Present in 85% of cases. Small round blue cells on histology with CD99 strong diffuse membrane staining.

Classic Presentation

Adolescent with painful diaphyseal lesion, fever, elevated ESR. Mimics osteomyelitis. Femur and pelvis most common sites (60% of cases).

Treatment Paradigm

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy first, then surgery. VDC-IE protocol for 14-17 cycles. Surgery or radiation for local control. Response to chemo predicts survival.

Prognosis Factors

Tumor volume under 200ml, under 90% necrosis post-chemo, metastases at presentation. 5-year survival: 70% localized, 30% metastatic.

Quick Decision Guide: Ewing Sarcoma Management

Clinical ScenarioStagingTreatmentKey Pearl
Localized extremity tumor, good chemo responseIB or IIB, over 90% necrosisWide excision + reconstructionLimb salvage in 85% - margins matter more than necrosis
Localized pelvic tumor, difficult locationIIB extracompartmentalChemotherapy + radiation (surgery if resectable)Radiation for unresectable sites - 55.8 Gy standard dose
Metastatic disease at presentationStage III with lung metsIntensive chemotherapy + local control + lung surgeryWhole lung radiation if unresectable - survival drops to 30%
Mnemonic

EWINGEwing Sarcoma Diagnostic Features

E
EWS-FLI1 fusion
t(11;22) translocation in 85% - diagnostic hallmark
W
White race predominance
Rare in African and Asian populations
I
Inflammatory presentation
Fever, elevated ESR, mimics osteomyelitis
N
Necrosis post-chemo
Over 90% necrosis predicts better survival
G
Glycogen-rich cells
Small round blue cells, PAS positive, CD99 positive

Memory Hook:EWING cells are small and angry - they look like infection but have the EWS-FLI1 fusion signature!

Mnemonic

VDC-IEVDC-IE Chemotherapy Protocol

V
Vincristine
Microtubule inhibitor
D
Doxorubicin
Anthracycline - cardiotoxicity risk
C
Cyclophosphamide
Alkylating agent
I
Ifosfamide
Alkylating agent - hemorrhagic cystitis risk
E
Etoposide
Topoisomerase inhibitor - secondary leukemia risk

Memory Hook:VDC-IE cycles: VDC for cycles 1,3,5 then IE for cycles 2,4,6 - alternating reduces resistance!

Mnemonic

MELTSEwing Sarcoma Prognosis Factors

M
Metastases at presentation
Worst prognostic factor - drops survival to 30%
E
Extremity vs axial
Extremity better prognosis than pelvis
L
Large tumor volume
Greater than 200ml associated with worse outcomes
T
Tumor necrosis under 90%
Poor response to chemotherapy predicts recurrence
S
Size over 8cm
Larger tumors have worse prognosis

Memory Hook:MELTS away your prognosis - avoid these factors!

Overview and Epidemiology

Why Ewing Sarcoma Matters

Ewing sarcoma is the second most common primary bone malignancy in children and adolescents (after osteosarcoma), representing 10-15% of all primary bone tumors. It is a highly aggressive small round cell tumor that requires urgent multimodal treatment. Before the advent of chemotherapy in the 1970s, 5-year survival was under 10%. Modern protocols combining chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation have improved survival to 70% for localized disease.

Demographics

  • Peak age: 10-20 years (75% of cases)
  • Second peak: 20-30 years (15% of cases)
  • Rare over age 30: 10% of cases
  • Gender: Male greater than Female (1.5:1 ratio)
  • Race: 85% white, rare in African/Asian populations

Anatomic Distribution

  • Femur: 25% (most common single site)
  • Pelvis: 20% (worst prognosis due to size)
  • Tibia/fibula: 15%
  • Humerus: 10%
  • Ribs: 10%
  • Axial skeleton: 20% (vertebrae, scapula)

The diaphysis of long bones is involved in 90% of extremity cases, distinguishing Ewing from osteosarcoma (which favors metaphysis). Pelvic tumors are often large at presentation due to deep location and delayed symptoms.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Biology

EWS-FLI1 Translocation: Diagnostic Gold Standard

t(11;22)(q24;q12) translocation creates the EWS-FLI1 fusion oncogene in 85% of Ewing sarcoma cases. The remaining 15% have variant translocations (e.g., EWS-ERG). This fusion protein acts as an aberrant transcription factor, driving uncontrolled proliferation of primitive neuroectodermal cells. FISH or RT-PCR for EWS rearrangement is mandatory for diagnosis - this confirms Ewing sarcoma and distinguishes it from other small round cell tumors.

Cell of Origin

Primitive neuroectodermal cells (mesenchymal stem cells). Cells are small, round, and blue with high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio. PAS-positive glycogen in cytoplasm. Cells express CD99 (MIC2) strongly - diffuse membrane staining pattern.

Growth Pattern

Highly aggressive. Permeative growth through bone marrow spaces. Extensive soft tissue extension common. Lytic destruction of cortex with periosteal reaction (onion-skin or sunburst pattern). Early hematogenous spread to lungs, bones, bone marrow.

Ewing SarcomaOsteosarcomaLymphoma
Age: 10-20 years (peak 15)Age: 10-20 years (peak 16)Age: Bimodal (10-20, over 60)
Location: DiaphysisLocation: MetaphysisLocation: Metaphysis/diaphysis
Histology: Small round blue cells, CD99 positiveHistology: Pleomorphic, osteoid productionHistology: Lymphoid cells, CD20/CD3 positive
Genetics: EWS-FLI1 fusion (85%)Genetics: Complex karyotype, TP53 mutationsGenetics: Various B/T-cell markers

Classification and Staging

Enneking Surgical Staging System

Gold standard for bone sarcomas. Based on tumor grade, local extent, and metastases.

StageGradeExtentMetastases5-Year Survival
IALow-gradeIntracompartmentalNoneNot applicable (Ewing always high-grade)
IBHigh-gradeIntracompartmentalNone70-75%
IIALow-gradeExtracompartmentalNoneNot applicable (Ewing always high-grade)
IIBHigh-gradeExtracompartmentalNone65-70%
IIIAny gradeAny extentPresent (regional or distant)25-30%

Ewing sarcoma is ALWAYS high-grade, so only stages IB, IIB, and III are relevant.

Compartment Definition

Intracompartmental: Tumor confined within bone cortex or within a single anatomic compartment (e.g., anterior thigh). Extracompartmental: Tumor extends beyond bone cortex into soft tissues OR crosses anatomic barriers (e.g., joint, neurovascular bundle). Most Ewing sarcomas at presentation are Stage IIB (high-grade, extracompartmental, no metastases).

AJCC 8th Edition for Bone Tumors

StageTumor (T)Nodes (N)Metastases (M)Grade (G)
IAT1 (under 8cm)N0M0G1/GX (low-grade)
IBT2/T3 (over 8cm or multifocal)N0M0G1/GX
IIAT1N0M0G2/G3 (high-grade)
IIBT2/T3N0M0G2/G3
IIIAny TN0M0G3 (undifferentiated)
IVAAny TN0M1a (lung only)Any G
IVBAny TN1 or M1b (other sites/bone/marrow)M1bAny G

Most Ewing sarcomas are Stage IIB (T2/T3, high-grade, no metastases) or Stage IVA/IVB (metastatic).

This staging system is useful for comparison with international databases but less practical for surgical planning than Enneking.

Clinical Presentation

History

  • Pain: Localized bone pain (90%) - progressive, worse at night
  • Swelling: Palpable soft tissue mass (60%)
  • Systemic symptoms: Fever (30%), weight loss, malaise
  • Duration: Symptoms 2-6 months before diagnosis (average 3 months)
  • Trauma history: 30% report antecedent trauma (coincidental, not causative)

Examination Findings

  • Inspection: Visible swelling, skin erythema, venous distension
  • Palpation: Warm, tender mass; soft tissue extension common
  • Function: Limp if lower extremity; restricted ROM
  • Neurovascular: Usually intact (invasion rare)
  • Lymph nodes: Regional nodes rarely involved (unlike soft tissue Ewing)

Beware the Mimicker: Ewing Masquerading as Infection

30% of patients present with fever, elevated WBC, and elevated ESR, leading to initial misdiagnosis as osteomyelitis. Key distinguishing features: Ewing typically has a longer symptom duration (months vs weeks), diaphyseal location (osteomyelitis favors metaphysis), and large soft tissue mass. Always biopsy a suspected infection that does not respond to antibiotics within 48-72 hours.

Ewing Sarcoma vs Osteomyelitis: Clinical Distinctions

FeatureEwing SarcomaOsteomyelitis
Duration of symptomsMonths (average 3)Days to weeks
Fever patternLow-grade, intermittentHigh-grade, persistent
Bone locationDiaphysisMetaphysis
Soft tissue massLarge, firmSmall or absent
Response to antibioticsNoneImproves within 48-72 hours

Investigations

Diagnostic Imaging Protocol

First LinePlain Radiographs

AP and lateral views of affected bone plus joint above and below. Classic findings: Permeative lytic lesion in diaphysis; moth-eaten bone destruction; onion-skin periosteal reaction (lamellated layers); Codman triangle (elevated periosteum); large soft tissue mass. Sunburst pattern less common than osteosarcoma.

Local StagingMRI with Contrast

Gold standard for local extent. Defines intramedullary involvement, soft tissue extension, neurovascular relationship, skip lesions. Essential for surgical planning. T1: Low signal in marrow. T2: High signal tumor and edema. Contrast: Heterogeneous enhancement of viable tumor.

Systemic StagingCT Chest

High-resolution CT chest to detect pulmonary metastases. Present in 15% at diagnosis. Nodules may be small (under 5mm). Follow-up CT every 3 months during treatment.

Systemic StagingWhole-Body Imaging

PET-CT or bone scan to detect skeletal metastases. Bone metastases in 10% at diagnosis. PET-CT also useful for assessing response to chemotherapy (decreased SUV indicates good response).

Bone MarrowBone Marrow Biopsy

Bilateral iliac crest marrow aspirate and biopsy to detect marrow involvement (5% at diagnosis). Presence of marrow disease portends poor prognosis (similar to metastatic disease).

Biopsy Technique: Get It Right the First Time

Biopsy planning is critical. Perform incisional or core needle biopsy along longitudinal axis of limb, in line with planned surgical incision. Avoid transverse incisions. Contaminated biopsy tract must be excised en bloc with tumor. Send fresh tissue for: 1) Cytogenetics (FISH for EWS rearrangement), 2) Flow cytometry, 3) Microbiology if infection suspected. Coordinate with oncology and pathology before biopsy.

Laboratory Investigations

  • CBC: Anemia (30%), leukocytosis (25%)
  • ESR/CRP: Elevated in 50% (non-specific)
  • LDH: Elevated in 60% (prognostic marker)
  • Alkaline phosphatase: Normal or mildly elevated
  • Renal/hepatic function: Baseline for chemotherapy

Histopathology Gold Standard

  • Morphology: Sheets of small round blue cells, uniform size
  • PAS stain: Positive for glycogen (diastase-sensitive)
  • CD99 (MIC2): Strong diffuse membrane staining (95%)
  • Cytogenetics: EWS-FLI1 fusion by FISH or RT-PCR (85%)
  • Differential: Negative for LCA (vs lymphoma), desmin (vs rhabdomyosarcoma)
Ewing sarcoma histology showing small round blue cells
Click to expand
Classic Ewing sarcoma histology (H&E stain) showing sheets of uniform small round blue cells - the diagnostic hallmark. Cells have round nuclei with fine chromatin and scant cytoplasm. Cytoplasmic glycogen (PAS positive) and strong membranous CD99 staining support the diagnosis. Cytogenetic confirmation of EWS-FLI1 translocation t(11;22) is essential.Credit: Niimi R et al., Oncol Lett - CC-BY
Cervical spine Ewing sarcoma in pediatric patient
Click to expand
8-panel collage of cervical spine Ewing sarcoma in an 8-year-old boy. Multimodality imaging: cervical X-ray showing widened spinal canal with tracheal shift, axial CT, sagittal and coronal MRI demonstrating paraspinal mass. Also includes clinical photo showing posterior neck mass, intraoperative view of tumor, and histology confirming small round blue cell morphology. While extremity involvement is most common, spinal Ewing sarcoma requires the same multimodal treatment approach.Credit: Bhat AR et al., J Neurosci Rural Pract - CC-BY

Management: Multimodal Treatment Paradigm

📊 Management Algorithm
Management algorithm for Ewing Sarcoma
Click to expand
Management algorithm for Ewing SarcomaCredit: OrthoVellum

Never Operate First: Chemotherapy Comes Before Surgery

Ewing sarcoma requires neoadjuvant chemotherapy FIRST. Surgery or radiation is performed after 10-14 weeks of induction chemotherapy. This approach: 1) Treats micrometastases early, 2) Reduces tumor size for easier resection, 3) Assesses chemotherapy response (over 90% necrosis = good prognosis). Operating first is a critical error that worsens survival and increases morbidity.

Multimodal Treatment Timeline

Weeks 0-2Diagnosis and Staging

Biopsy confirmation. Complete staging (MRI, CT chest, PET-CT, bone marrow biopsy). Multidisciplinary tumor board review. Counsel patient and family. Central line placement.

Weeks 2-14Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

VDC-IE protocol: Vincristine, Doxorubicin, Cyclophosphamide alternating with Ifosfamide, Etoposide. Typically 5-6 cycles over 10-14 weeks. Monitor for toxicity (cardiotoxicity, hemorrhagic cystitis, neutropenia). Restaging MRI at week 10 to assess response.

Weeks 14-16Local Control: Surgery or Radiation

Preferred: Wide surgical excision with negative margins. Alternative: Radiation therapy (55.8 Gy) for unresectable tumors (pelvis, spine). Pathology assessment of percent necrosis (over 90% = good responder).

Weeks 16-48Adjuvant Chemotherapy

Continue VDC-IE for total of 14-17 cycles (approximately 48 weeks total treatment). If good response (over 90% necrosis): standard protocol. If poor response (under 90% necrosis): consider intensified regimen or clinical trial.

OngoingSurveillance

Years 0-2: CT chest and MRI local site every 3 months. Years 2-5: Every 6 months. After 5 years: Annual imaging. Monitor for late effects (cardiac, pulmonary, secondary malignancies).

Standard VDC-IE Protocol

VDC cycles (Weeks 1, 7, 13, etc.):

  • Vincristine 2 mg/m² IV (max 2 mg) on Day 1
  • Doxorubicin 75 mg/m² IV over 48 hours on Days 1-2
  • Cyclophosphamide 1200 mg/m² IV on Day 1

IE cycles (Weeks 4, 10, 16, etc.):

  • Ifosfamide 1800 mg/m² IV daily for 5 days (Days 1-5)
  • Etoposide 100 mg/m² IV daily for 5 days (Days 1-5)
  • Mesna (uroprotection for ifosfamide) 1800 mg/m² IV daily

Total duration: 48 weeks (approximately 14-17 cycles depending on protocol)

Chemotherapy Toxicity Monitoring

Doxorubicin cardiotoxicity: Monitor with ECHO or MUGA at baseline, 6 months, and end of treatment. Cumulative dose limit 450-550 mg/m². Ifosfamide hemorrhagic cystitis: Prevented with mesna (binds acrolein metabolite). Neutropenic fever: G-CSF support. Secondary malignancies: Etoposide increases risk of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) at 2-5 years.

Wide Excision with Limb Salvage

Goal: Achieve wide margins (2cm healthy tissue around tumor) while preserving limb function.

Indications for surgery:

  • Extremity tumors amenable to resection
  • Tumor response to chemotherapy (any degree - surgery preferred even for poor responders)
  • Patient fit for major surgery

Surgical options:

  1. En bloc resection + endoprosthetic reconstruction (most common for long bones)
  2. En bloc resection + allograft reconstruction
  3. En bloc resection + vascularized fibula graft
  4. Rotationplasty (for distal femur in skeletally immature)
  5. Amputation (if limb salvage not feasible - rare, under 10%)

Surgical Pearls

  • Excise biopsy tract en bloc with tumor
  • Wide margins more important than percent necrosis for local control
  • Save neurovascular bundle if not involved (usually spared)
  • Frozen section of margins intraoperatively
  • Send specimen fresh for pathology assessment of necrosis

Surgical Pitfalls

  • Operating before chemotherapy (incorrect sequencing)
  • Inadequate margins (5-10% local recurrence risk)
  • Failing to excise biopsy tract (tumor seeding)
  • Contamination during resection (violating tumor pseudocapsule)
  • Inadequate reconstruction planning (limb length discrepancy)

Limb Salvage Rate: 85-90% in Extremity Tumors

Modern chemotherapy and surgical techniques allow limb salvage in 85-90% of extremity Ewing sarcomas. Amputation is reserved for: 1) Tumors with extensive neurovascular involvement, 2) Pathologic fracture with gross contamination, 3) Infection of endoprosthesis, 4) Patient preference. Functional outcomes of limb salvage are superior to amputation in most studies.

Radiation for Local Control

Indications:

  • Unresectable tumor (pelvic, spine, base of skull)
  • Positive margins after surgery (adjuvant radiation)
  • Refusal of surgery or medical contraindication
  • Poor surgical candidate

Dosing:

  • Definitive radiation (no surgery): 55.8 Gy in 31 fractions
  • Adjuvant radiation (positive margins): 50.4-55.8 Gy
  • Boost to gross disease: Additional 5.4-10.8 Gy

Technique:

  • IMRT or proton therapy preferred (reduces dose to normal tissues)
  • Include entire bone + 2cm margin + soft tissue extension
  • Respect chemotherapy-induced tumor shrinkage (treat original extent)

Surgery vs Radiation Debate

Surgery is preferred over radiation for local control when feasible. Reasons: 1) Lower local recurrence rate (5-10% vs 10-20%), 2) Avoids radiation-induced growth arrest in skeletally immature patients, 3) No risk of radiation-induced sarcoma (1-2% at 10 years), 4) Pathology assessment of tumor necrosis (prognostic). However, radiation achieves excellent local control for unresectable sites (pelvis, spine) where surgery would cause unacceptable morbidity.

Radiation therapy is particularly important for pelvic Ewing sarcoma, where surgery often achieves only marginal margins due to anatomic constraints.

Prognostic Factors

Prognostic Factors in Ewing Sarcoma

FactorFavorableUnfavorableImpact on 5-Year Survival
Metastases at diagnosisLocalized diseaseMetastatic (lung, bone, marrow)70% vs 25-30%
Response to chemotherapyOver 90% necrosisUnder 90% necrosis75% vs 50%
Tumor volumeUnder 200 mlOver 200 ml70% vs 50%
Tumor siteExtremity (distal)Pelvis, axial skeleton75% vs 50%
Age at diagnosisUnder 15 yearsOver 15 years70% vs 55%
LDH levelNormalElevated70% vs 55%

Percent Necrosis: The Most Important Modifiable Prognostic Factor

Over 90% tumor necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the single most important modifiable prognostic factor. Patients with over 90% necrosis have 75% 5-year survival vs 50% for under 90% necrosis. This finding guides adjuvant therapy: good responders continue standard protocol, poor responders may be enrolled in intensified regimens or clinical trials. However, surgical margins are more important than necrosis for local control.

Surgical Technique

Principles of Limb Salvage Surgery

Surgical Goals

Primary Objectives:

  • Wide surgical margins (tumor-free tissue surrounding specimen)
  • En bloc resection of tumor with intact pseudocapsule
  • Reconstruction to restore function
  • Facilitate adjuvant chemotherapy (wound healing)

Margin Classification (Enneking):

  • Intralesional - through tumor (inadequate)
  • Marginal - through reactive zone (high recurrence)
  • Wide - through normal tissue (goal for cure)
  • Radical - entire compartment (rarely needed)

Timing and Sequencing

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy First:

  • 10-12 weeks of chemotherapy before surgery
  • Shrinks tumor, allows assessment of response
  • May convert borderline cases to limb salvage
  • Reduces micrometastatic disease

Surgical Timing:

  • After recovery from chemotherapy toxicity
  • When counts adequate (platelets greater than 100, WBC greater than 3)
  • Usually 2-3 weeks after last chemotherapy cycle
  • Coordinate with oncology team

Key Surgical Principles

Biopsy Tract Excision:

  • Biopsy tract must be excised en bloc with specimen
  • Prior incisional or needle biopsy site included in resection
  • Contaminated tissue must not remain

Wide Margin Achievement:

  • 2-3 cm soft tissue margin where possible
  • Normal muscle cuff around tumor
  • Sacrifice adjacent contaminated structures
  • Neurovascular preservation if possible (if not encased)

Reconstruction Options:

  • Endoprosthetic replacement - modular tumor prostheses
  • Allograft reconstruction - structural allograft
  • Allograft-prosthetic composite - combination
  • Vascularized fibula - for intercalary defects
  • Rotationplasty - specialized limb-sparing option

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "What are the principles of surgical resection in Ewing sarcoma?" Answer: Wide en bloc resection with 2-3 cm margins. Include biopsy tract. Surgery performed after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (10-12 weeks). Limb salvage possible in 80-90% with modern techniques. Specimen assessed for percent necrosis.

Limb salvage surgery achieves equivalent oncological outcomes to amputation with modern techniques and multimodal therapy.

Site-Specific Surgical Approaches

Surgical Options by Anatomical Location

LocationSurgical OptionsReconstructionSpecial Considerations
Distal femurDistal femoral resectionModular endoprosthesis, allograft-prosthetic compositeMost common site, excellent function possible
Proximal tibiaProximal tibial resectionEndoprosthesis, allograft compositeExtensor mechanism reconstruction critical
Proximal humerusProximal humeral resectionEndoprosthesis, allograft, spacerShoulder function limited but hand function preserved
PelvisPelvic resection (Type I-IV)Reconstruction varies, may be 'defect left'High morbidity, radiation often preferred
SpineVertebrectomy if feasibleInstrumented fusion, cage reconstructionOften radiation primary; surgery for instability
Ribs/chest wallChest wall resectionMesh, flap reconstructionMay need thoracic surgery involvement

Technical Considerations

Neurovascular Management

Assessment:

  • MRI to assess vessel involvement
  • Angiography if encasement suspected
  • Plan for vascular bypass if needed

Preservation Strategy:

  • If tumor displaces but does not encase vessels - preserve
  • If vessel encased - sacrifice and reconstruct
  • Sacrifice critical nerve only if encased
  • Consider vascular surgery input for bypass

Soft Tissue Coverage

Flap Planning:

  • Anticipate soft tissue defects
  • Local muscle flaps (gastrocnemius, soleus, latissimus)
  • Free flaps for large defects
  • Plastic surgery involvement as needed

Wound Considerations:

  • Chemotherapy delays healing
  • Avoid tension on closure
  • Drain placement away from prosthesis
  • Plan for postoperative radiation if margins close

Endoprosthetic Reconstruction

Modular Tumor Prostheses:

  • Custom or modular systems available
  • Allow intraoperative adjustment of length
  • Cemented or press-fit fixation
  • Growing prostheses for skeletally immature patients

Technical Steps:

  1. En bloc resection with wide margins
  2. Measure resection length precisely
  3. Prepare bone for prosthetic insertion
  4. Assemble modular components
  5. Cement fixation (or press-fit)
  6. Reconstruct soft tissues around prosthesis
  7. Closure over drains

Rotationplasty (Van Nes Procedure)

Indication:

  • Young patients with distal femoral or proximal tibial Ewing
  • When limb salvage would result in poor function
  • Preserves knee joint (as "new hip"), ankle (as "new knee")
  • Better function than above-knee amputation

Technique:

  • Resect tumor-bearing segment
  • Rotate distal limb 180 degrees
  • Ankle plantarflexion acts as knee flexion
  • Fit with below-knee type prosthesis

Oncological Principles Non-Negotiable

Never compromise oncological margins for reconstruction:

  • Wide margin is mandatory for cure
  • Positive margin dramatically increases local recurrence
  • Amputation remains an option if limb salvage unsafe
  • Discuss with MDT before any margin compromise

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "How do you plan reconstruction after tumor resection?" Key points: Modular endoprosthesis for most long bone resections. Include biopsy tract. Soft tissue coverage planned preoperatively. Growing prostheses in children. Rotationplasty for young patients where standard limb salvage would give poor function. Never compromise margins for reconstruction.

Surgical technique must balance oncological adequacy with functional reconstruction, always prioritizing tumor control.

Complications

Chemotherapy Complications

ComplicationIncidenceCausative AgentManagement
Cardiomyopathy5-10% (clinical), 30% (subclinical)Doxorubicin (cumulative dose)Baseline and serial ECHO; dexrazoxane cardioprotection; limit cumulative dose
Hemorrhagic cystitis10-30% without mesnaIfosfamideMesna uroprotection; aggressive hydration; monitor urinalysis
Neutropenic fever40-60%Myelosuppression (all agents)G-CSF support; prophylactic antibiotics; urgent admission if fever
Secondary malignancy (AML)1-2% at 10 yearsEtoposide, alkylating agentsLong-term surveillance; no prevention available

Surgical Complications

ComplicationIncidenceRisk FactorsManagement
Infection5-15%Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, endoprosthesisAntibiotics; irrigation and debridement; prosthesis retention vs removal
Local recurrence5-10%Positive margins, poor chemo responseRe-excision or radiation; metastatic workup
Limb length discrepancyVariableSkeletally immature patientsExpandable prosthesis; contralateral epiphysiodesis

Radiation Complications

  • Growth arrest: Radiation to growth plates in skeletally immature patients
  • Radiation-induced sarcoma: 1-2% at 10 years (latency 5-20 years)
  • Pathologic fracture: Radiation-weakened bone (5-10%)
  • Soft tissue fibrosis: Chronic pain, reduced ROM

Modern IMRT and proton therapy reduce these complications significantly compared to older techniques.

Metastatic Progression

Lung metastases (most common):

  • Incidence: 15% at diagnosis, additional 30% develop during treatment
  • Detection: High-resolution CT chest every 3 months
  • Treatment: Intensified chemotherapy; surgical resection if oligometastatic (under 5 nodules); whole lung radiation if unresectable
  • Prognosis: 30% 5-year survival (vs 70% localized)

Bone and bone marrow metastases:

  • Incidence: 10% bone, 5% marrow at diagnosis
  • Detection: PET-CT or bone scan; bilateral marrow biopsy
  • Treatment: Systemic chemotherapy; radiation to symptomatic sites
  • Prognosis: 25% 5-year survival (similar to lung metastases)

Local progression:

  • Pathologic fracture (10%)
  • Neurovascular compression
  • Compartment syndrome (rare)

Metastatic disease at presentation is the worst prognostic factor, reducing 5-year survival from 70% to 25-30%.

Postoperative Care

Immediate Postoperative Care

Wound Management

Early Wound Care:

  • Closed suction drainage (remove when output less than 30 mL/24h)
  • Daily wound inspection for hematoma, infection
  • Chemotherapy may delay wound healing
  • Avoid tension on closure

Infection Prevention:

  • Perioperative antibiotics (24-48 hours)
  • Clean dressing technique
  • Monitor for signs of infection
  • Higher infection risk due to immunosuppression

Rehabilitation

Early Mobilization:

  • Weight-bearing as per reconstruction type
  • Range of motion exercises when wound stable
  • Physical therapy referral
  • Occupational therapy for upper limb tumors

Prosthesis-Specific:

  • Protected weight-bearing if endoprosthesis
  • May need assistive devices initially
  • Progress per surgeon protocol

Coordination with Oncology

Chemotherapy Resumption:

  • Continue adjuvant chemotherapy 2-4 weeks post-surgery
  • When wound healing adequate and counts recovered
  • Coordinate timing with oncology team
  • Total treatment duration approximately 12 months

Specimen Assessment:

  • Histopathological analysis of resected tumor
  • Percent necrosis reported (response to chemotherapy)
  • Margin status documented
  • Guides subsequent therapy

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "What is the postoperative care after Ewing sarcoma surgery?" Answer: Wound management (higher infection risk). Resume adjuvant chemotherapy within 2-4 weeks when healed. Specimen assessed for percent necrosis (over 90% = good responder). Rehabilitation tailored to reconstruction. Ongoing surveillance for local recurrence and metastasis.

Postoperative care focuses on wound healing, rehabilitation, and seamless transition to adjuvant chemotherapy.

Detailed Postoperative Management

Postoperative Timeline

TimeframeKey ActivitiesGoals
Day 0-3Drain management, pain control, mobilizationSafe recovery, prevent complications
Week 1-2Wound checks, initiate rehabilitationAdequate healing, restore function
Week 2-4Resume chemotherapy when healedContinue multimodal treatment
Month 3Imaging reassessment (MRI, chest CT)Monitor for recurrence/metastasis
OngoingSurveillance imaging, functional assessmentLong-term cancer control and function

Reconstruction-Specific Protocols

Endoprosthesis Care

Weight-Bearing:

  • Immediate partial weight-bearing with crutches
  • Progress to full weight-bearing over 4-6 weeks
  • Earlier mobilization than biological reconstruction

Precautions:

  • Avoid high-impact activities
  • Monitor for loosening, infection
  • Lifetime surveillance for implant failure
  • May need revision for wear or loosening

Allograft Care

Weight-Bearing:

  • Protected weight-bearing for 3-6 months
  • Wait for allograft incorporation
  • Serial radiographs to assess healing

Risks:

  • Nonunion (10-20%)
  • Fracture of allograft (15-25%)
  • Infection (10-15%)
  • Resorption over time

Surveillance Protocol

Recommended Surveillance Schedule:

  • Chest CT every 3 months for 2 years
  • Then every 6 months until year 5
  • Annually thereafter (or as per institutional protocol)
  • Local MRI every 6 months for 2 years, then annually

Late Effects Monitoring:

  • Cardiac function (doxorubicin exposure)
  • Renal function (ifosfamide exposure)
  • Fertility assessment
  • Secondary malignancy surveillance (especially if radiation)

Red Flags for Recurrence

Seek immediate evaluation for:

  • New pain at surgical site
  • Palpable mass or swelling
  • New pulmonary symptoms (lung metastases)
  • Any new bone pain (skeletal metastases)
  • Constitutional symptoms (fever, weight loss)

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "What is the surveillance protocol after Ewing sarcoma treatment?" Answer: Chest CT every 3 months for 2 years (lungs are most common metastatic site), then less frequently. Local MRI every 6 months. Monitor for late effects: cardiomyopathy (doxorubicin), nephrotoxicity (ifosfamide), secondary malignancy (radiation).

Postoperative surveillance aims to detect recurrence early while monitoring for treatment-related late effects.

Outcomes

Survival Outcomes

Prognostic Factors

Factors Affecting Prognosis

FactorGood PrognosisPoor Prognosis
Metastases at diagnosisLocalized diseaseMetastatic disease (worst factor)
Tumor necrosisOver 90% necrosis after chemoUnder 90% necrosis (poor responder)
Surgical marginsWide negative marginsPositive or marginal margins
Tumor sizeUnder 8 cmOver 8 cm
LocationExtremity (distal)Axial (pelvis, spine)
AgeYounger patientsOlder patients (over 18)

Key Outcome Determinants:

  • Metastatic disease at presentation is the single worst prognostic factor
  • Percent tumor necrosis is the most important modifiable factor
  • Surgical margins critical for local control
  • Chemotherapy completion essential for systemic control

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "What is the prognosis for Ewing sarcoma?" Answer: Localized disease: 70% 5-year survival. Metastatic at diagnosis: 25-30% (worst prognostic factor). Over 90% tumor necrosis post-chemotherapy associated with better outcomes. Complete multimodal therapy (chemo + surgery + radiation) is essential.

With modern multimodal therapy, most patients with localized Ewing sarcoma are cured, but metastatic disease remains a significant challenge.

Detailed Survival Analysis

Survival by Disease Stage and Response

Category5-Year EFS5-Year OSKey Factors
Localized, good responder (over 90% necrosis)75-80%80-85%Best outcomes, continue standard therapy
Localized, poor responder (under 90% necrosis)45-55%55-65%Consider intensified/experimental therapy
Metastatic (lung only)30-35%35-40%Whole lung irradiation may improve outcomes
Metastatic (bone/bone marrow)15-20%20-25%Worst prognosis, often palliative
Recurrent disease10-20%15-25%Prognosis poor; depends on site, timing

Functional Outcomes

Limb Salvage Function

MSTS Functional Score (Enneking):

  • Most patients achieve 70-85% function
  • Upper extremity: good hand function preserved
  • Lower extremity: ambulatory with or without aids
  • Quality of life comparable to amputation

Long-Term Considerations:

  • Endoprosthesis may need revision (10-20% at 10 years)
  • Leg length discrepancy in growing children
  • Activity limitations (no high impact)
  • Chronic pain in some patients

Amputation Outcomes

When Required:

  • Oncologically equivalent survival
  • Higher rates of activity participation in some studies
  • Prosthetic function generally good
  • Body image issues may occur

Advantages:

  • No implant-related complications
  • More durable solution
  • May allow higher activity level

Recurrence Patterns

Local Recurrence:

  • 10-15% with adequate margins and radiation
  • Higher with inadequate margins
  • Treatment: re-resection (if possible), radiation, chemotherapy
  • Prognosis: 20-30% long-term survival

Distant Metastases:

  • Most common site: lungs (50-60%)
  • Also: bone, bone marrow, other soft tissues
  • Treatment: systemic chemotherapy ± local control of metastases
  • Prognosis: poor (15-25% 5-year survival)

Late Effects

Late Effects of Ewing Sarcoma Treatment

EffectCauseIncidenceMonitoring
CardiomyopathyDoxorubicin cumulative toxicity5-10% clinical, 30% subclinicalSerial ECHO, limit cumulative dose
InfertilityAlkylating agents, radiation to pelvis20-40%Pre-treatment fertility preservation
Secondary malignancyRadiation, alkylating agents5-10% at 20 yearsLifelong surveillance
NephrotoxicityIfosfamide10-20%Monitor renal function, hydration
Growth disturbanceRadiation to growth platesVariableLimb length monitoring in children

Exam Pearl

Exam Viva Point: "What are the long-term outcomes and late effects after Ewing sarcoma treatment?" Answer: 70% survival for localized disease. Late effects include cardiomyopathy (doxorubicin), infertility (alkylating agents), and secondary malignancy (radiation). Lifelong surveillance required. Functional outcomes with limb salvage: 70-85% MSTS score. Most survivors have good quality of life.

Long-term survivors require ongoing surveillance for both recurrence and treatment-related late effects.

Evidence Base and Key Trials

INT-0091: Alternating VDC-IE vs VDC Alone

1
Grier HE, Krailo MD, et al. • J Clin Oncol (2003)
Key Findings:
  • Multi-center RCT: 518 patients with localized Ewing sarcoma
  • VDC-IE (intensified) vs VDC alone
  • 5-year EFS: 69% (VDC-IE) vs 54% (VDC) - significant improvement
  • Toxicity higher with VDC-IE but acceptable
Clinical Implication: VDC-IE alternating regimen became standard of care for Ewing sarcoma, improving survival by 15% compared to VDC alone.
Limitation: Higher toxicity with IE cycles; requires aggressive supportive care.

EURO-EWING 99: Surgery vs Radiation for Local Control

2
Paulussen M, Craft AW, et al. • Lancet Oncol (2008)
Key Findings:
  • Retrospective analysis: 1426 patients
  • Surgery had 8% local failure vs 19% for radiation
  • No difference in overall survival (both groups received systemic chemo)
  • Radiation more common for pelvic tumors (difficult resection)
Clinical Implication: Surgery is preferred for local control when feasible, achieving lower local recurrence rates than radiation.
Limitation: Not a randomized trial; selection bias favored surgery for resectable tumors.

AEWS0031: Interval-Compressed Chemotherapy

1
Womer RB, West DC, et al. • J Clin Oncol (2012)
Key Findings:
  • RCT: 568 patients randomized to standard (3-week) vs compressed (2-week) VDC-IE cycles
  • 5-year EFS: 73% (compressed) vs 65% (standard) - significant improvement
  • Toxicity similar between groups with G-CSF support
  • Benefit greatest in patients under 18 years
Clinical Implication: Interval-compressed chemotherapy every 2 weeks with G-CSF improves event-free survival by 8% and is now standard in pediatric protocols.
Limitation: Requires reliable G-CSF support; adult protocols have not universally adopted compression.

Percent Necrosis Meta-Analysis

3
Picci P, Böhling T, et al. • J Clin Oncol (1997)
Key Findings:
  • Meta-analysis of 1058 patients across multiple studies
  • Over 90% necrosis: 75% 5-year survival
  • Under 90% necrosis: 50% 5-year survival
  • Percent necrosis is independent prognostic factor
Clinical Implication: Over 90% tumor necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the most important modifiable prognostic factor, guiding intensification of adjuvant therapy for poor responders.
Limitation: Pathology assessment of necrosis is subjective and varies between institutions.

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: Initial Presentation and Diagnosis (~3 min)

EXAMINER

"A 14-year-old boy presents with a 3-month history of progressive right thigh pain and swelling. He has had intermittent fevers. X-ray shows a permeative lytic lesion in the mid-femoral diaphysis with an onion-skin periosteal reaction and soft tissue mass. ESR is elevated. His GP started him on antibiotics 2 weeks ago with no improvement. What is your assessment and management?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This presentation is highly suspicious for **Ewing sarcoma**, though the differential includes osteomyelitis and lymphoma. Key features suggesting Ewing over infection are: prolonged symptom duration (3 months), diaphyseal location, large soft tissue mass, lack of response to antibiotics, and classic onion-skin periosteal reaction. My approach would be: First, complete staging workup including **MRI of the thigh with contrast** to assess local extent, **CT chest** for pulmonary metastases, **whole-body PET-CT or bone scan** for skeletal metastases, and **bilateral bone marrow biopsy**. Second, coordinate with oncology for **incisional or core needle biopsy** - critical to biopsy along the longitudinal axis of the limb, as the tract will need to be excised with the tumor. Send tissue for histopathology (looking for small round blue cells, CD99 positive), cytogenetics (EWS-FLI1 fusion by FISH), and microbiology. Third, if Ewing is confirmed, treatment is **neoadjuvant chemotherapy first** (VDC-IE protocol for 10-14 weeks), then **wide surgical excision** with limb salvage reconstruction, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy for a total of 48 weeks. I would counsel the family about excellent 5-year survival (70% for localized disease), multimodal treatment requirements, and potential complications including chemotherapy toxicity and surgical risks.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Recognize Ewing sarcoma vs osteomyelitis based on clinical features
Complete staging before biopsy (MRI, CT chest, PET-CT, marrow biopsy)
Coordinate biopsy with oncology - longitudinal axis, fresh tissue for cytogenetics
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy BEFORE surgery - critical sequencing
COMMON TRAPS
✗Operating before chemotherapy - major error that worsens outcomes
✗Biopsy without cytogenetics - cannot confirm EWS-FLI1 fusion
✗Transverse biopsy incision - contaminates excision planes
✗Missing metastatic workup - 25% have metastases at diagnosis
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if the biopsy shows small round blue cells but is CD99 negative?"
"How do you differentiate Ewing from lymphoma histologically?"
"What is the EWS-FLI1 fusion and why is it important?"
"What chemotherapy protocol would you use?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 2: Local Control Decision-Making (~4 min)

EXAMINER

"A 16-year-old girl with biopsy-proven Ewing sarcoma of the distal femur has completed 14 weeks of VDC-IE chemotherapy. Restaging MRI shows excellent response with 60% reduction in soft tissue mass. The tumor remains 2cm from the distal femoral physis. She is skeletally immature (Risser 2). Discuss your approach to local control."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This case involves **local control decision-making in a skeletally immature patient** with good chemotherapy response. My options are **surgery or radiation therapy**. I would favor **wide surgical excision** for several reasons: First, surgery provides lower local recurrence rates (5-10% vs 10-20% for radiation). Second, it allows pathologic assessment of percent necrosis, which is the most important prognostic factor. Third, it avoids radiation-induced growth arrest of the distal femoral physis in a skeletally immature patient. Fourth, it eliminates the 1-2% risk of radiation-induced sarcoma. My surgical approach would be: **En bloc resection** of the distal femur including tumor, biopsy tract, and adequate margins (2cm healthy bone proximally and distally). Reconstruction options include: 1) **Expandable endoprosthetic replacement** (my preference - allows lengthening as she grows), 2) **Distal femoral allograft-prosthetic composite**, or 3) **Rotationplasty** (excellent function but cosmetically challenging). I would excise the distal femoral physis and growth plate en bloc with the tumor. Postoperatively, the surgical specimen would be assessed for percent necrosis - if over 90%, continue standard adjuvant VDC-IE; if under 90%, consider treatment intensification or clinical trial enrollment. If surgery is not feasible or the family refuses, **radiation therapy** (55.8 Gy) would be the alternative, though it carries growth arrest and late complication risks.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Surgery preferred over radiation for local control when feasible
Expandable prosthesis addresses limb length discrepancy in skeletally immature
En bloc resection includes biopsy tract and adequate margins
Percent necrosis on surgical specimen guides adjuvant therapy intensity
COMMON TRAPS
✗Choosing radiation to 'preserve the growth plate' - tumor involves physis, must be excised
✗Inadequate margins to preserve limb length - margins are paramount
✗Not discussing rotationplasty - excellent functional option despite cosmesis
✗Forgetting to excise biopsy tract - risk of local recurrence
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What are the pros and cons of rotationplasty?"
"How do you assess percent necrosis on the surgical specimen?"
"What would you do if margins are positive?"
"What is the role of radiation after surgery with positive margins?"
VIVA SCENARIOCritical

Scenario 3: Metastatic Disease Management (~3 min)

EXAMINER

"A 17-year-old presents with Ewing sarcoma of the proximal humerus. Staging workup reveals 4 pulmonary nodules (5-12mm) on CT chest and bone marrow involvement (5% tumor cells on bilateral iliac crest biopsy). How would you manage this patient?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is **Stage III (metastatic) Ewing sarcoma** with lung and bone marrow involvement, which carries a much worse prognosis (25-30% 5-year survival vs 70% for localized disease). My management approach: First, **systemic chemotherapy is the priority** - I would use the same VDC-IE protocol as for localized disease, though this patient may be a candidate for **dose-intensified regimens or clinical trial enrollment** given the poor prognosis. Second, for **local control of the primary tumor**, I would still aim for **wide surgical excision** of the proximal humerus after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as local control improves overall survival even in metastatic disease. Reconstruction options include allograft-prosthetic composite or endoprosthetic replacement. Third, for the **lung metastases**, I would reassess with CT chest after 3-6 cycles of chemotherapy. If nodules remain oligometastatic (under 5 nodules) and resectable, **bilateral pulmonary metastasectomy** can be considered - complete resection improves survival. If unresectable or progressive, **whole lung radiation** (15-18 Gy) may be used as a last resort. Fourth, **bone marrow involvement** is treated with systemic chemotherapy alone - there is no role for marrow-directed therapy. Fifth, I would counsel the patient and family about the **guarded prognosis** (25-30% 5-year survival), importance of clinical trial participation if available, and aggressive supportive care during treatment. Long-term surveillance for recurrence is critical.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Metastatic disease at presentation is worst prognostic factor (25-30% survival)
Systemic chemotherapy is priority; consider dose-intensified regimens or trials
Local control of primary tumor still important even with metastases
Pulmonary metastasectomy if oligometastatic and resectable after chemo
COMMON TRAPS
✗Abandoning local control of primary because of metastases - still improves survival
✗Not offering clinical trial enrollment - important for this poor-prognosis group
✗Jumping to whole lung radiation before attempting metastasectomy
✗Overly optimistic counseling - prognosis is guarded, family must understand
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What are the indications for pulmonary metastasectomy?"
"Is there a role for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue?"
"How do you manage disease progression on first-line chemotherapy?"
"What is the long-term surveillance protocol for survivors?"

MCQ Practice Points

Pathognomonic Translocation Question

Q: What is the most common chromosomal translocation in Ewing sarcoma? A: t(11;22)(q24;q12) creating the EWS-FLI1 fusion oncogene, present in 85% of cases. The remaining 15% have variant translocations (e.g., EWS-ERG). This fusion is detected by FISH or RT-PCR and is diagnostic for Ewing sarcoma, distinguishing it from other small round cell tumors.

Histopathology Question

Q: What immunohistochemical marker is most sensitive for Ewing sarcoma? A: CD99 (MIC2) with strong diffuse membrane staining, positive in 95% of Ewing sarcomas. However, CD99 is not entirely specific (can be positive in lymphoblastic lymphoma, synovial sarcoma). The combination of CD99 positivity, PAS-positive glycogen, and EWS-FLI1 fusion confirms the diagnosis.

Treatment Sequencing Question

Q: What is the correct sequence of treatment for localized Ewing sarcoma? A: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy → Local control (surgery or radiation) → Adjuvant chemotherapy. Total treatment duration is approximately 48 weeks. Operating before chemotherapy is a critical error that worsens outcomes by failing to treat micrometastases and assess chemotherapy response.

Prognostic Factor Question

Q: What is the most important modifiable prognostic factor in Ewing sarcoma? A: Percent tumor necrosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with over 90% necrosis have 75% 5-year survival vs 50% for under 90% necrosis. This finding guides adjuvant therapy intensity. However, surgical margins are more important than necrosis for local control.

Differential Diagnosis Question

Q: How do you differentiate Ewing sarcoma from osteomyelitis clinically? A: Key features: Ewing has longer symptom duration (months vs weeks), diaphyseal location (osteomyelitis favors metaphysis), large soft tissue mass, and no response to antibiotics. Always biopsy a suspected infection that does not improve within 48-72 hours of antibiotics, especially with lytic diaphyseal lesion and soft tissue mass.

Metastatic Disease Question

Q: What percentage of Ewing sarcoma patients present with metastatic disease, and what are the most common sites? A: 25% present with metastases. Most common sites: Lungs (15%), bone (10%), and bone marrow (5%). Metastatic disease at presentation reduces 5-year survival from 70% to 25-30%. Complete staging includes CT chest, PET-CT or bone scan, and bilateral bone marrow biopsy.

Australian Context and Medicolegal Considerations

Australian Treatment Protocols

  • ANZSA (Australian and New Zealand Sarcoma Association) provides national guidelines for Ewing sarcoma management
  • Treatment at tertiary sarcoma centers (Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Westmead Children's Hospital Sydney, Lady Cilento Brisbane)
  • Pediatric oncology units coordinate chemotherapy protocols
  • PBS subsidizes chemotherapy agents (vincristine, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, etoposide)

Multidisciplinary Tumor Board

  • Mandatory discussion at sarcoma tumor board before treatment initiation
  • Team includes: Orthopedic oncologist, medical oncologist, radiation oncologist, radiologist, pathologist
  • eTG (Therapeutic Guidelines) provides antibiotic prophylaxis protocols for surgery
  • ACSQHC (Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care) standards for cancer care

Medicolegal Considerations

Key documentation requirements:

  • Informed consent for chemotherapy (cardiotoxicity, hemorrhagic cystitis, infertility, secondary malignancy risks)
  • Informed consent for surgery (infection, local recurrence, limb length discrepancy, neurovascular injury)
  • Tumor board documentation of treatment plan
  • Pathology confirmation of EWS-FLI1 fusion before starting chemotherapy
  • Discussion of fertility preservation (sperm banking for males, oocyte preservation for females) before starting chemotherapy - alkylating agents cause infertility
  • Long-term surveillance plan documented (cardiac monitoring, secondary malignancy screening)

Common litigation issues:

  • Delayed diagnosis (misdiagnosed as osteomyelitis or sports injury)
  • Operating before chemotherapy (incorrect sequencing)
  • Inadequate surgical margins leading to local recurrence
  • Failure to discuss fertility preservation before chemotherapy

EWING SARCOMA

High-Yield Exam Summary

Key Pathology

  • •EWS-FLI1 fusion t(11;22) in 85% - diagnostic hallmark
  • •Small round blue cells, PAS-positive glycogen
  • •CD99 strong diffuse membrane staining (95%)
  • •High-grade malignancy, early hematogenous spread

Clinical Presentation

  • •Age 10-20 years, diaphysis of long bones (90%)
  • •Painful swelling, fever (30%), elevated ESR - mimics infection
  • •Femur and pelvis most common (60% of cases)
  • •25% present with metastases (lung, bone, marrow)

Staging Workup

  • •MRI local site - assess extent, soft tissue involvement
  • •CT chest - detect lung metastases (15% at diagnosis)
  • •PET-CT or bone scan - skeletal metastases (10% at diagnosis)
  • •Bilateral bone marrow biopsy - marrow involvement (5%)

Treatment Algorithm

  • •Neoadjuvant chemo FIRST (VDC-IE protocol, 10-14 weeks)
  • •Local control: Wide excision (preferred) or radiation (55.8 Gy)
  • •Adjuvant chemo to complete 48 weeks total (14-17 cycles)
  • •Assess percent necrosis: over 90% = good prognosis

Surgical Pearls

  • •Limb salvage in 85-90% of extremity tumors
  • •Wide margins (2cm healthy tissue) more important than necrosis
  • •Excise biopsy tract en bloc with tumor
  • •Expandable prosthesis for skeletally immature patients

Prognostic Factors

  • •Metastases at diagnosis: 70% vs 25-30% survival (localized vs metastatic)
  • •Over 90% necrosis post-chemo: 75% vs 50% survival
  • •Tumor volume under 200ml: Better prognosis
  • •Pelvic tumors: Worse prognosis (large, difficult resection)
Quick Stats
Reading Time138 min
Related Topics

Articular Cartilage Structure and Function

Bending Moment Distribution in Fracture Fixation

Biceps Femoris Short Head Anatomy

Biofilm Formation in Orthopaedic Infections