Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Case report
Full Version
Unusual Presentations of a Benign Cartilaginous Tumour- An Interesting and Extremely Rare Case Report
Correspondence Address :
Subhransu Kumar Hota,
Patholab Health Care Pvt. Limited, Mangalabag, Cuttack, Bhubaneswar-753001, Odisha, India.
E-mail: subhhota1985@gmail.com
Chondroblastoma is one of the benign cartilaginous bone tumours. Location wise, it is mostly located in immature epiphysis of long bones. Along with epiphysis, many times it also involves metaphysis. Pure metaphyseal tumours are uncommon. Pure diaphyseal tumours are rarest with only very few cases reported in the literature. The most common age group for this tumour is 10-17 years. It is uncommon in patients less than 10 years and those more than 25 years of age. Diaphyseal chondroblastoma in less than 10 years of age group is extremely rare. Hereby, authors report a case of 14-month-old male child who presented to the paediatric orthopaedic outdoor with complaints of the swollen left leg and associated pain by the parents for the last 1 month. There was no history of trauma/weight loss/fever. No difficulty in walking was present. Local examinations of the left leg showed a well-defined globular swelling of size 3×3 cm in the middle part medial aspect. The underlying tibia was continuous with that of swelling having restricted painful movement. X-ray showed an osteolytic, expansile, cortical, eccentric lesion in the middle third (diaphysis) of the left tibia. Correlating the clinical and radiological findings, clinical diagnosis of osteofibrous dysplasia was considered. The intralesional curettage and bone grafting were done and tissue was sent for histopathology. Histopathology showed the characteristic findings of chondroblastoma. The final diagnosis of diaphyseal chondroblastoma of the left tibia was made. The postoperative events were unremarkable and the patient followed-up to eight months with a happy outcome without any residual disease or recurrence.
Chondroblastoma, Diaphyseal, Histopathology, Paediatric, Tibia, Tumour
A 14-month-old male child presented to Paediatric Orthopaedic Outpatient Department (OPD) with complaints of the swollen left leg and associated pain by the parents for the last one month. The swelling was gradually increasing in size associated with mild pain as observed by parents. There was no history of trauma/weight loss/fever. No other swellings were present in the body. No difficulty in walking was observed. Family history was not significant. Developmental milestones were normal as per age. General examination was not significant with stable vitals. Local examination of the left leg showed a well-defined globular swelling of size 3×3 cm in the middle part medial aspect. The overlying skin was unremarkable. There were no associated features of inflammation like the local rise of temperature or redness. The swelling was firm in consistency with well-demarcated borders. The underlying tibia was continuous to that of swelling with restricted painful movement. The distal neural deficit was not present. Considering bony swelling X-ray was advised along with routine haematological and biochemical tests. Routine haematological and biochemical tests were within normal limits whereas X-ray showed an osteolytic, expansile, cortical, eccentric lesion in the middle third (diaphysis) of the left tibia (Table/Fig 1).
Correlating the clinical and radiological findings, clinical diagnosis of osteofibrous dysplasia was considered. The intralesional curettage and bone grafting were done as per standard protocol and tissue sent for histopathology. There were multiple bits of soft grey-brown tissue along with bone chips measuring 3.0×2.5×1.5 cm. Histopathology revealed a cellular neoplasm comprising of tumour cells having round to ovoid vesicular nuclei and some containing nuclear grooves. There were scattered multinucleated osteoclastic giant cells along with foci of cartilage. There were irregular areas of calcification along with chicken wire calcification (Table/Fig 2), (Table/Fig 3), (Table/Fig 4). As the histopathology showed a classical picture of chondroblastoma, final diagnosis of diaphyseal chondroblastoma of the left tibia was made. The postoperative events were unremarkable and the patient followed-up to eight months with a happy outcome without any residual disease or recurrence.
Chondroblastoma is one of the benign cartilaginous bone tumours. Location wise it is mostly in immature epiphysis of long bones. It is seen more commonly in males of age group 10-25 years (1). Chondroblastoma belongs to a group of benign cartilaginous tumours in the 5th edition of the World Health Organisation (WHO) which was classified under intermediate biologic potential previously (2),(3). Characteristically, it is a lytic bone tumour with a site predilection for epiphysis. Along with epiphyses, many times it involves the metaphysis too. Pure metaphyseal lesions are uncommon. Pure diaphyseal tumours are rarest with only very few cases reported in the literature (4). This benign chondroid neoplasm was first described by Kolodny. He called it a ‘‘cartilage containing Giant Cell Tumour (GCT)’’ in 1927. This tumour was afterwards renamed by Ewing as a “calcifying GCT’’ in the year 1928 (5),(6),(7). Most common long bones affected by this tumour are the humerus in the upper limb and femur along with the tibia in the lower limb (5). Mayo-Smith W et al., reviewed five large series and concluded that the bones surrounding the knee joint like the distal femur along with proximal tibia are most commonly affected and next is the proximal part of the humerus (8).
For knowing histogenesis and more affinity towards epiphyses of this tumour several studies were conducted and many types of researches are going on. The majority of them concluded that the major pathway is the active growth plate signaling pathway. Through this pathway, a committed mesenchymal cell for cartilage formation is the main culprit for the development of chondroblastoma. The above explanation may be a possible explanation of the association between chondroblastoma of epiphysis as well as epimetaphysis (9). Present case is unique as we are describing a pure diaphyseal chondroblastoma. To know the possible pathogenesis in present case we searched literature extensively although could not get satisfactory answer. Brien EW et al., explained that multipotential mesenchymal cells located in tendon sheath may be a possible reason for this diaphyseal origin of chondroblastoma (10). Ma X et al., published one case of diaphyseal chondroblastoma of the tibia in an 18-year-old male who thought that the origin may be from the embryonic rest of cartilage before enchondral ossification starts (4). We are also thinking the same as that of Ma X et al., for possible cause in our case. The most common age group for this tumour is 10-17 years. It is uncommon in patients less than 10 years and those more than 25 years of age (11). One less than 10 years of age and diaphyseal location of chondroblastoma are extremely rare. One case of diaphyseal chondroblastoma of radius in seven-year-old girl child was reported by Punit A et al., (2014) is the only reported case in less than 10 years (12).
The present case will be the first Indian reported case of diaphyseal chondroblastoma in such a young male child of fourteen months of age. Clinical presentations are often non specific. In present case, also there was pain and swelling at the local site. In a minority of cases, it may present as limp (13). The radiographic apperance is usually suggestive of the diagnosis. It is an Intramedullary lesion with a sharp well-defined margin that may be sclerosed frequently. More often calcification is also seen inside (12). In present case, it was a lesion with a clear distinct margin located at diaphysis but sclerosis and calcification were not well appreciated. So, we made a diagnosis of osteofibrous dysplasia clinically. Histopathology is confirmatory. It is a tumour comprising of chondroblastic cells with minimal pleomorphism, having a round to oval nuclei over the chondroid matrix. Some of the tumour cells contain nuclear grooves. A good number of osteoclastic giant cells are also noted. Chicken wire calcification (fine calcification surrounding tumour cells) is the most characteristic (4). Present case was showing characteristic microscopic findings of chondroblastoma. Other giant cell containing lesions like GCT of bone may come as differential but in current case as it was diaphyseal location, containing chicken wire calcification GCT was ruled out. As there was nuclear grooving Langerhans Histiocytosis (LCH) may come as a differential but eosinophils were absent as well as chicken wire calcification was there along with cartilage strongly suggesting chondroblastoma. En-block resection and curettage are the preferred methods of treatment (14). Chondroblastoma has a good surgical outcome but the major problem is a recurrence which is more common in curettage treated patients as well as in epiphyseal lesions compared to en-block dissection and other locations like diaphysis (12),(14). After curettage and bone grafting recurrence rate is still high varying from 10-35% (15).
Diaphyseal chondroblastoma is a rare tumour and manifestations in less than ten years age group is extremely rare. This case we think is the first case of diaphyseal chondroblastoma having the earliest manifestation in 14 months of age. Although exact pathogenesis is not known, further researches may help to know the exact histogenesis. Early intervention results in a happy outcome.
The authors are thankful to Dr. Niranjan Rout, Dr. Padmalaya Nayak, Dr. Snehalata Pattnaik, and Dr. Lity Mohanty for their constant support and helping hands in the preparation of this article.
10.7860/JCDR/2021/50262.15199
Date of Submission: May 12, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Jun 21, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jun 30, 2021
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2021
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: May 13, 2021
• Manual Googling: Jun 13, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Jul 08, 2021 (20%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com