Background: We investigated osteoporosis management strategies and clinical outcomes following the occurrence of medicationrelated osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). Methods: We retrospectively studied individuals diagnosed with MRONJ during osteoporosis treatment who were managed in the Osteoporosis Center or the Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Dental Unit at Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong between 2010 and 2022. We examined subsequent osteoporosis management plans, fracture events, and bone mineral density (BMD). Results: Thirty-six individuals were included (mean age, 78.5 years; 94.4% women). The estimated prevalence of MRONJ was 0.26%. All patients had been exposed to bisphosphonates, and seven had also received denosumab before MRONJ. Following MRONJ, only 14 individuals continued anti-osteoporosis treatment, a decision influenced by a higher fracture probability at MRONJ onset. The most common regimen was a teriparatide-raloxifene sequence (n=8): three patients achieved stable BMD, four achieved improving BMD, and one exhibited a mixed response. The patient with a mixed BMD response had also been treated with denosumab. Six patients sustained incident fractures after MRONJ, and these patients had lower BMD T-scores than their counterparts. Two patients experienced MRONJ recurrence, which was associated with the resumption of bisphosphonate or denosumab therapy after MRONJ. These patients had higher BMD T-scores than those who did not experience MRONJ recurrence. Conclusion MRONJ is challenging because high fracture risk necessitates discontinuation of antiresorptive agents. Teriparatide followed by raloxifene may be a reasonable regimen. Individualised decisions in osteoporosis management after MRONJ are required to balance fracture risk reduction with minimising MRONJ recurrence.

INTRODUCTIONEndometrial carcinoma is the most common gynaecological malignancy. Studies have shown that laparoscopic total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection was advantageous compared to laparotomy in reducing length of stay and intraoperative blood loss. However, these studies had a predominantly Caucasian population. A comparison study was conducted among the Singapore population to investigate the differences in oncological and surgical outcomes between these two methods.

METHODSA retrospective, single-centre cohort study was conducted. Records of hospitalised patients with Stage 1 endometrioid carcinoma from 2008 to 2014 were extracted for review. Demographic data and study-specific parameters, including operative time, length of hospitalisation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pain scores, final staging and recurrence rates, were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS475 endometrioid carcinoma patients were admitted for surgical staging, among whom 374 fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Out of these patients, 229 underwent laparotomy and 145 underwent laparoscopy. The race, parity and body mass index of both groups were comparable. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery reported reduced pain score within two hours postoperatively (p = 0.007) and at Postoperative Days 1, 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Laparoscopic surgery also illustrated better outcomes such as reduced length of stay (p < 0.001) and reduced intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001). The operative time, recurrence rate and disease-free intervals were comparable between both groups.

CONCLUSIONLaparoscopy offered similar oncological outcomes with superior surgical outcomes compared to laparotomy. It provides a suitable alternative in the surgical staging of endometrioid carcinoma.

Introduction: Individuals who are exposed to cytotoxic agents are at risk of developing therapyrelated myeloid neoplasms (t-MN). Cytogenetic findings of a neoplasm play an important role in stratifying patients into different risk groups and thus predict the response to treatment and overall survival. Case report: A 59-year-old man was diagnosed with acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Following this, he underwent all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) based chemotherapy and achieved remission. Four years later, the disease relapsed and he was given idarubicin, mitoxantrone and ATRA followed by maintenance chemotherapy (ATRA, mercaptopurine and methotrexate). He achieved a second remission for the next 11 years. During a follow-up later, his full blood picture showed leucocytosis, anaemia and leucoerythroblastic picture. Bone marrow examination showed hypercellular marrow with trilineage dysplasia, 3% blasts but no abnormal promyelocyte. Fluorescence in-situ hybridisation (FISH) study of the PML/RARA gene was negative. Karyotyping result revealed complex abnormalities and monosomal karyotype (MK). A diagnosis of therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome/myeloproliferative neoplasm with unfavourable karyotypes and MK was made. The disease progressed rapidly and transformed into therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia in less than four months, complicated with severe pneumonia. Despite aggressive treatment with antibiotics and chemotherapy, the patient succumbed to the illness two weeks after the diagnosis. Discussion and Conclusion: Diagnosis of t-MN should be suspected in patients with a history of receiving cytotoxic agents. Karyotyping analysis is crucial for risk stratification as MK in addition to complex aberrant karyotypes predicts unfavourable outcome. Further studies are required to address the optimal management for patients with t-MN.