THE PATHOLOGY OF OSTEOCLASTOMA OR GIANT-CELL TUMOUR OF BONE

Abstract

Changing views as to tile nature of this tumour have led to a diverse and confusing terminology-myeloma, myeloid sarcoma, tumeur a my#{233}loplaxes benign giant-cell tumour, osteoclastoma and “ chronic (non-suppurative) hemorrhagic osteomyelitis “ being only some of the names applied to it. Most of these terms are inappropriate and should be discarded-myeloma and myeloid because the tumours are not derived from any constituent of bone-marrow, N#{233}laton’s tumeur a my#{233}loplaxes because the tumour giant-cells are certainly not megakaryocytes, and Barrie’s “ chronic hemorrhagic osteomyelitis “ because its falsity was exposed promptly by Stewart in 1922. Giant-cell tumour is a non-committal and satisfactory name, so long as it is not invariably linked, as Bloodgood linked it in 1924, with the adjective benign. The term “ osteoclastoma “ was first used in Great Britain by Stewart in 1922 and was later adopted by most British pathologists. There now seems little room for doubt that this expresses correctly the histogenesis of the tumour. The close similarity between the tumour giant-cells and the larger osteoclasts of bone-resorptive lesions, the identity of appearance of the tumour tissue with that of the masses of mingled fibroblastic and osteoclastic tissue in hyperparathyroidism (often wrongly called osteoclastomata for this very reason) , and the