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.

Melorheostosis

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Melorheostosis

Comprehensive coverage of melorheostosis including pathophysiology, MAP2K1 mutations, dripping candle wax radiographic appearance, sclerotomal distribution, management strategies, and surgical complications for orthopaedic surgery examination preparation

complete
Updated: 2026-01-08
High Yield Overview

MELORHEOSTOSIS

'Dripping Candle Wax' Sclerosing Bone Dysplasia | Sclerotomal Distribution | MAP2K1 Mutation

1:1Mestimated incidence
MAP2K1somatic mutation (50%)
50%present by age 20
Highsurgical recurrence rate

CLINICAL PATTERNS

Monostotic
PatternSingle bone involvement
TreatmentObservation or limited excision
Polyostotic
PatternMultiple bones, often one limb
TreatmentConservative management preferred
Soft Tissue
PatternAdjacent fibrosis, contractures
TreatmentPhysiotherapy, consider release

Critical Must-Knows

  • Dripping candle wax appearance - pathognomonic dense cortical hyperostosis flowing along bone cortex on radiographs
  • Sclerotomal distribution - classically follows a single sclerotome (dermatomal equivalent for bone)
  • MAP2K1 somatic mutation - identified in approximately 50% of cases, activates MAPK/ERK pathway
  • Pain and stiffness - predominant symptoms; contractures from soft tissue involvement
  • Surgery has high recurrence - limited surgical role; excision complicated by disease recurrence and joint stiffness

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Describe the classic radiographic appearance: dense, irregular cortical hyperostosis resembling 'dripping candle wax' flowing down the bone
  • "
    Know the differential diagnosis: osteopoikilosis (round lesions), osteopathia striata (linear striations), parosteal osteosarcoma, myositis ossificans
  • "
    Understand management is primarily conservative: NSAIDs, physiotherapy, bisphosphonates trial; surgery reserved for severe contractures or deformity
  • "
    Surgical complications include high recurrence, stiffness, and incomplete symptom relief

Critical Melorheostosis Exam Points

Pathognomonic Radiographic Sign

Dripping candle wax appearance - dense, flowing cortical hyperostosis along one side of the bone cortex. This is the hallmark imaging finding and is virtually diagnostic. No other condition produces this exact pattern.

Sclerotomal Distribution

Single sclerotome involvement - the disease classically affects bones, soft tissues, and skin derived from a single somite. This explains the linear, segmental distribution often confined to one limb.

MAP2K1 Mutation Discovery

Somatic mosaic mutation in MAP2K1 gene identified in ~50% of cases. This activates MEK1 and the MAPK/ERK signaling pathway, causing osteoblast hyperactivity. This is a post-zygotic mutation (not inherited).

Surgery Has Limited Role

High surgical recurrence rate - disease often recurs after excision. Joint contracture release complicated by recurrent stiffness. Bone excision and soft tissue releases have unpredictable outcomes. Conservative management is first-line.

Quick Decision Guide

Clinical ScenarioKey FeaturesManagementExam Pearl
Incidental finding, asymptomaticCharacteristic imaging, no symptomsObservation, reassurance, no treatmentMany cases are discovered incidentally on imaging
Pain with preserved functionSymptomatic but functionalNSAIDs, physiotherapy, bisphosphonate trialConservative management is first-line for most cases
Severe contracture or deformityFunctional impairment, failed conservative RxSurgical release, osteotomy, or excisionWarn patient about high recurrence and stiffness risk
Mnemonic

CANDLEDiagnostic Features of Melorheostosis

C
Cortical hyperostosis
Dense sclerotic bone along cortex
A
Asymmetric, unilateral pattern
Often confined to one limb
N
No periosteal reaction
Distinguishes from infection or tumor
D
Dripping wax appearance
Pathognomonic radiographic finding
L
Limb contractures
Soft tissue fibrosis causes stiffness
E
ERK pathway activation
MAP2K1 mutation drives disease

Memory Hook:CANDLE - think of wax dripping down a candle! The dripping candle wax appearance is the key diagnostic feature.

Mnemonic

STIFFClinical Features

S
Sclerotomal distribution
Follows embryonic somite pattern
T
Tenderness and pain
Most common presenting symptom
I
Insidious onset
Slowly progressive over years
F
Fibrosis of soft tissues
Contractures, skin changes, muscle involvement
F
Functional limitation
Joint stiffness, reduced ROM

Memory Hook:STIFF - the disease makes joints STIFF! Pain and contractures are the cardinal clinical features.

Mnemonic

POMPDifferential Diagnosis

P
Parosteal osteosarcoma
Malignant, lobulated, periosteal origin
O
Osteopoikilosis
Multiple round sclerotic foci (spotted bones)
M
Myositis ossificans
History of trauma, peripheral calcification
P
Progressive diaphyseal dysplasia
Camurati-Engelmann, bilateral symmetric

Memory Hook:POMP - think of the POMP and circumstance of diagnosis! These are the key differentials for sclerotic bone lesions.

Overview and Epidemiology

Clinical Significance

Melorheostosis (from Greek: melos = limb, rhein = flow, osteon = bone) is a rare, sporadic sclerosing bone dysplasia characterized by dense cortical hyperostosis with a pathognomonic dripping candle wax appearance on radiographs. First described by Leri and Joanny in 1922, it remains one of the rarest bone conditions, with fewer than 500 cases reported in the literature. The 2013 discovery of somatic MAP2K1 mutations has transformed understanding of its pathogenesis.

Demographics

  • Incidence: Estimated 1 per 1,000,000 (extremely rare)
  • Age: Any age; 50% present before age 20
  • Gender: Equal male:female distribution
  • Inheritance: Sporadic (somatic mosaic mutation)
  • Laterality: Usually unilateral, confined to one limb

Natural History

  • Onset: Childhood to adulthood, insidious
  • Progression: Slowly progressive over decades
  • Distribution: Follows sclerotomal pattern
  • Symptoms: Pain (most common), stiffness, contractures
  • Prognosis: Benign but disabling; no malignant transformation

Anatomic Distribution

Melorheostosis shows a characteristic pattern of involvement:

  • Lower limb predominance: 70% of cases
  • Upper limb: 20% of cases
  • Axial skeleton: Rare (10%), usually in combination with limb disease
  • Monostotic vs polyostotic: Equal distribution; polyostotic often in adjacent bones
  • Sclerotomal pattern: Classically involves bones, muscles, fascia, and skin from a single embryonic somite

The sclerotomal distribution explains why the disease often follows a dermatomal pattern, with skin and soft tissue changes overlying the affected bones.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Genetics

MAP2K1 Somatic Mutation

Molecular Pathogenesis

The landmark 2013 discovery by Kang et al. identified somatic activating mutations in MAP2K1 (encoding MEK1) in approximately 50% of melorheostosis lesions. This explains the sporadic, non-inherited nature and mosaic distribution. The mutation activates the RAS-MAPK-ERK signaling pathway, leading to osteoblast hyperactivity and excessive bone formation. Importantly, mutations are found in affected tissue only (not blood), confirming somatic mosaicism.

Molecular Mechanism

  • Gene: MAP2K1 (mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1)
  • Protein: MEK1 (dual-specificity kinase)
  • Mutation type: Activating, somatic, mosaic
  • Pathway: RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK cascade
  • Effect: Constitutive ERK activation in osteoblasts

Cellular Consequences

  • Osteoblasts: Hyperactive bone formation
  • Bone remodeling: Uncoupled, favoring formation
  • Soft tissues: Fibroblast activation, fibrosis
  • Vasculature: Vascular malformations in some cases
  • Skin: Scleroderma-like changes over affected areas

Histopathology

Microscopic examination of affected bone reveals:

  • Dense lamellar bone: Mature, well-organized lamellar bone (not woven)
  • Haversian system preservation: Normal osteons within sclerotic bone
  • Trabecular thickening: Increased trabecular bone mass
  • Periosteal new bone: Layers of new bone on cortical surface
  • Soft tissue fibrosis: Dense fibrous tissue in adjacent soft tissues
  • No inflammatory infiltrate: Distinguishes from chronic osteomyelitis
  • No nuclear atypia: Distinguishes from malignancy

Sclerotomal Theory

The classic theory explaining melorheostosis distribution is the sclerotomal hypothesis:

  • Sclerotome: Embryonic somite derivative that forms vertebra and associated bones
  • Single sclerotome: Disease affects structures from one embryonic segment
  • Linear pattern: Explains why disease follows a limb in linear fashion
  • Mosaic mutation: Fits with post-zygotic somatic mutation affecting single cell lineage

However, some cases do not fit this pattern, suggesting alternative mechanisms or earlier mutations affecting multiple lineages.

Clinical Presentation

Cardinal Features

Presenting Symptoms

The clinical presentation of melorheostosis is highly variable, ranging from incidental discovery to severe disability:

  1. Pain (50-80%): Dull, aching, often worse with activity
  2. Stiffness (60-80%): Joint contractures, reduced range of motion
  3. Deformity (40-60%): Limb length discrepancy, angular deformity
  4. Skin changes (20-40%): Scleroderma-like hardening over affected areas
  5. Limb swelling (30%): From bone enlargement and soft tissue involvement

Pain Characteristics

  • Quality: Deep, aching, bone pain
  • Pattern: Often worse with activity, may have night pain
  • Location: Over affected bone segment
  • Progression: Slowly worsening over years
  • Response to NSAIDs: Variable, often partial relief

Contracture Patterns

  • Joints: Adjacent to affected bones
  • Mechanism: Soft tissue fibrosis, capsular involvement
  • Common sites: Knee, elbow, ankle, fingers
  • Severity: Mild limitation to severe fixed contracture
  • Progression: Gradually worsening over time

Physical Examination

Inspection:

  • Limb asymmetry (affected limb may be shorter or angular)
  • Skin changes: thickening, induration, scleroderma-like appearance
  • Visible bone enlargement in superficial locations
  • Muscle wasting from disuse or direct involvement

Palpation:

  • Hard, irregular bone masses along cortical surface
  • Non-tender or mildly tender
  • Skin may feel indurated, bound down
  • Reduced soft tissue mobility over affected areas

Range of Motion:

  • Joint contractures in adjacent joints
  • Fixed flexion deformities common
  • End-range pain with stretching
  • May have limb length discrepancy

Age-Related Presentations

Childhood (under 10 years):

  • Limb length discrepancy
  • Angular deformity
  • Delayed motor milestones
  • May be mistaken for developmental conditions

Adolescence/Young Adult:

  • Pain with increasing activity
  • Joint stiffness affecting sports, activities
  • Cosmetic concerns
  • Peak time for diagnosis

Adult:

  • Progressive pain and stiffness
  • Occupational limitations
  • May have been symptomatic for decades before diagnosis
  • Osteoarthritis in affected joints

Imaging and Diagnosis

Radiographic Imaging - Diagnostic Standard

Pathognomonic Radiographic Finding

The dripping candle wax appearance is virtually pathognomonic for melorheostosis. This consists of dense, irregular, flowing cortical hyperostosis along one side of the bone, resembling wax that has dripped down and hardened along a candle. The sclerosis typically involves one cortex (eccentric) and may extend across joints to involve adjacent bones in the same sclerotome.

Key Radiographic Features:

  • Dense cortical hyperostosis: Markedly increased bone density
  • Flowing/dripping pattern: Irregular wavy margins like melted wax
  • Eccentric distribution: Usually one side of bone cortex
  • Crosses joints: May extend to adjacent bones
  • No periosteal reaction: Distinguishes from infection/tumor
  • Soft tissue calcification: May see adjacent soft tissue ossification

Radiographic Patterns

Most CommonClassic Dripping Wax

Dense cortical hyperostosis flowing along the bone cortex, typically along one side. The outer margin is irregular and wavy, while the inner margin may encroach on the medullary canal. This pattern is pathognomonic.

Less CommonSpotted Pattern

Focal sclerotic areas within the medullary cavity, resembling osteopoikilosis. May coexist with classic dripping wax pattern. This variant is called melorheostotic variant of mixed sclerosing bone dysplasia.

VariantLinear Pattern

Linear striations of dense bone, similar to osteopathia striata. May represent overlap syndrome or variant pattern. Less common than classic presentation.

RareMyositis Ossificans-like

Soft tissue ossification extending from bone, mimicking myositis ossificans or parosteal osteosarcoma. Important to correlate with clinical history (no trauma history) and histology.

CT Imaging

CT provides superior assessment of:

  • Cortical extent: Precise delineation of sclerotic bone
  • Medullary involvement: Extension into medullary canal
  • Joint involvement: Intra-articular extension, osteoarthritis
  • Soft tissue ossification: Better detection than radiographs
  • Surgical planning: 3D reconstruction for complex cases

MRI - Soft Tissue Assessment

MRI is valuable for evaluating:

  • Soft tissue fibrosis: Low signal on T1 and T2
  • Muscle involvement: Atrophy, fibrosis, fatty replacement
  • Neurovascular compression: Important for surgical planning
  • Joint involvement: Synovitis, capsular thickening
  • Marrow changes: Usually normal signal in sclerotic areas

Imaging Modality Selection

ModalityIndicationKey Findings
Plain radiographInitial diagnosis, surveillanceDripping candle wax, cortical hyperostosis
CT scanSurgical planning, cortical detailPrecise extent, 3D reconstruction
MRISoft tissue assessment, nerve evaluationFibrosis, muscle involvement, neurovascular

Bone Scintigraphy

  • Increased uptake: In affected areas on bone scan
  • Extent assessment: May show involvement beyond radiographic findings
  • Activity monitoring: Intensity may correlate with disease activity
  • Limited specificity: Cannot distinguish from other sclerotic conditions

Differential Diagnosis

Other Sclerosing Bone Dysplasias

ConditionRadiographic PatternDistributionKey Distinguishing Feature
MelorheostosisDripping candle waxSclerotomal, unilateralFlowing cortical hyperostosis along one cortex
OsteopoikilosisMultiple round foci (spotted bones)Bilateral, symmetricRound/oval sclerotic foci near joints
Osteopathia striataLinear striationsBilateral, symmetricLongitudinal dense lines in metaphyses
Progressive diaphyseal dysplasiaFusiform cortical thickeningBilateral, symmetric, diaphysealCamurati-Engelmann, inherited, systemic symptoms

Key Differential Point

Osteopoikilosis (spotted bones) consists of multiple small, round, well-defined sclerotic foci clustered near joints - completely different from the flowing, linear dripping wax of melorheostosis. Osteopathia striata shows linear striations but is bilateral and symmetric, unlike the unilateral sclerotomal pattern of melorheostosis.

Mixed Sclerosing Bone Dysplasia

Some patients show features of multiple sclerosing dysplasias:

  • Melorheostosis + osteopoikilosis
  • Osteopathia striata + osteopoikilosis
  • Overlap syndromes suggest common pathogenetic mechanism

This ends the comparison of sclerosing dysplasias.

Malignant Conditions to Exclude

ConditionKey FeaturesImaging CluesDefinitive Diagnosis
Parosteal osteosarcomaLow-grade surface osteosarcomaLobulated, encircles cortex, radiolucent cleftBiopsy shows malignant osteoid production
Osteoblastic metastasesHistory of primary cancerMultiple lesions, axial predominanceClinical history, biopsy
Sclerosing osteosarcomaAggressive bone tumorPeriosteal reaction, soft tissue massBiopsy shows high-grade malignancy

Parosteal Osteosarcoma Differentiation

Parosteal osteosarcoma is the most important malignant mimic. Key differences: (1) Parosteal osteosarcoma is lobulated and tends to encircle the bone, while melorheostosis flows along one cortex; (2) Parosteal osteosarcoma often has a radiolucent cleft between tumor and cortex initially; (3) Parosteal osteosarcoma is a discrete mass, not a flowing linear pattern; (4) Clinical history of slow progression over decades favors melorheostosis. When in doubt, biopsy is mandatory.

No other significant malignant mimics require discussion.

Other Benign Differential Considerations

ConditionKey FeaturesDifferentiation from Melorheostosis
Myositis ossificansPost-traumatic heterotopic ossificationHistory of trauma, zonal phenomenon, matures peripherally
Chronic osteomyelitisSclerotic bone with sequestrumHistory of infection, cloaca, involucrum, inflammatory markers
Fibrous dysplasiaGround-glass matrixCentral lesion, not cortical, different matrix pattern
Caffey diseaseInfantile cortical hyperostosisInfants only, mandible involvement, fever, self-limiting

When Biopsy is Needed

Biopsy is indicated when:

  • Diagnosis uncertain despite classic imaging
  • Atypical features suggesting malignancy
  • Rapid progression (unusual for melorheostosis)
  • Soft tissue mass concerning for parosteal osteosarcoma
  • Patient under 5 years (very rare for melorheostosis, consider other causes)

This concludes the benign differential considerations.

Management

Conservative Management - First-Line Approach

Conservative is First-Line

Conservative management is the mainstay of treatment for melorheostosis. Surgery has unpredictable results with high recurrence rates. Most patients can be managed with a combination of analgesics, physiotherapy, and supportive measures. Surgery is reserved for severe contractures or deformity causing functional impairment.

Pain Management

  • NSAIDs: First-line analgesics, often provide partial relief
  • Paracetamol: Adjunct for mild pain
  • Neuropathic agents: Gabapentin, pregabalin if nerve involvement
  • Opioids: Reserved for severe, refractory pain
  • Local measures: Heat, ice, TENS

Physiotherapy

  • Goals: Maintain ROM, prevent contracture progression
  • Stretching: Regular stretching of affected joints
  • Strengthening: Maintain muscle function
  • Hydrotherapy: May be beneficial for pain and mobility
  • Orthotics: Splints to maintain position, AFOs for drop foot

Bisphosphonates

Rationale: Bisphosphonates inhibit osteoclast activity and reduce bone turnover. While melorheostosis is primarily an osteoblastic condition, there is some evidence for pain reduction with bisphosphonate therapy.

Evidence:

  • Case reports and small series suggest benefit in some patients
  • May reduce pain scores in subset of patients
  • Effect on bone formation is limited
  • Trial of therapy is reasonable for symptomatic patients

Regimen:

  • Alendronate 70mg weekly or
  • Zoledronic acid 5mg IV annually
  • Trial for 6-12 months to assess response

Limited Evidence for Bisphosphonates

Evidence for bisphosphonate efficacy in melorheostosis is limited to case reports and small case series. Response is variable, with some patients experiencing significant pain relief and others showing no benefit. A therapeutic trial is reasonable but patients should be counseled about uncertain efficacy.

Other Medical Therapies

  • Nifedipine: Calcium channel blocker, reported to reduce pain in isolated cases
  • MEK inhibitors: Targeted therapy under investigation given MAP2K1 mutation
  • Denosumab: RANKL inhibitor, theoretical benefit, case reports only

This section covers the conservative management of melorheostosis.

Surgical Management

Surgery Has Limited Role

Surgical treatment of melorheostosis has high recurrence rates and unpredictable outcomes. Surgery is reserved for:

  1. Severe contractures causing functional impairment
  2. Angular deformity requiring correction
  3. Limb length discrepancy requiring equalization
  4. Nerve compression syndromes
  5. Removal of symptomatic osteophytes

Patients must be counseled about the high likelihood of disease recurrence and potential for postoperative stiffness.

Surgical Indications

IndicationProcedureExpected OutcomeComplication Risk
Severe fixed flexion contractureSoft tissue release, capsulotomyVariable improvement in ROMHigh - recurrent contracture common
Angular deformityCorrective osteotomyDeformity correction achievableModerate - delayed union, recurrence
Limb length discrepancyEpiphysiodesis or lengtheningLength equalization possibleStandard limb length surgery risks
Nerve compressionDecompression, neurolysisVariable symptom reliefRecurrence of compression possible

Surgical Techniques

Soft Tissue Release:

  • Identify contracted structures (capsule, ligaments, fascia)
  • Complete release of all contracted elements
  • Extensive release often required
  • Intraoperative ROM assessment
  • Immediate postoperative therapy essential
  • High recurrence rate (50% or more)

Corrective Osteotomy:

  • Standard osteotomy principles apply
  • Sclerotic bone is difficult to cut
  • Healing may be delayed
  • May need bone graft augmentation
  • Internal fixation achievable but challenging
  • Disease may recur at osteotomy site

Bone Excision:

  • Removal of symptomatic bony prominences
  • Complete excision of affected segment rarely possible
  • Recurrence of sclerotic bone is common
  • Consider for isolated, accessible lesions
  • Warn patient of recurrence risk

Postoperative Management

  • Intensive physiotherapy: Essential to maintain surgical gains
  • Continuous passive motion: May help prevent recurrent stiffness
  • Splinting: Night splints to maintain position
  • Close follow-up: Monitor for recurrence
  • Patient expectations: Counsel about likely need for repeat procedures

This covers the surgical management of melorheostosis.

Surgical Complications

Recurrence

  • Rate: 50% or higher after soft tissue releases
  • Timing: May occur within months of surgery
  • Pattern: Same tissues re-contract
  • Management: Repeat release, aggressive PT
  • Prevention: Intensive early mobilization

Stiffness

  • Paradox: Surgery for stiffness may cause more stiffness
  • Mechanism: Tissue fibrosis, scarring
  • Prevention: Early aggressive mobilization
  • CPM: May help maintain ROM gains
  • Outcome: Often worse ROM than preoperatively

Wound Complications

  • Skin involvement may impair healing
  • Sclerodermatous skin is fragile
  • Higher infection risk with compromised tissue
  • May need plastic surgery consultation
  • Consider staged procedures for extensive surgery

Nerve/Vessel Injury

  • Fibrotic tissues encase neurovascular structures
  • Dissection is difficult and hazardous
  • Preoperative imaging essential
  • May need neurolysis for adherent nerves
  • Higher risk of injury than standard surgery

Disease Progression

  • Surgery does not halt disease progression
  • New areas of involvement may develop
  • Adjacent joints may become affected
  • Long-term outcome depends on disease extent, not surgery
  • Realistic expectations essential for patient counseling

This covers the complications associated with melorheostosis surgery.

Evidence Base

MAP2K1 Mutations in Melorheostosis

Case series
Kang H, Jha S, Deng Z, et al. • Nature Communications (2018)
Key Findings:
  • Somatic MAP2K1 mutations identified in 8 of 15 melorheostosis lesions (53%)
  • Mutations activate MEK1 and downstream ERK signaling
  • Mutations found only in affected tissue, not blood (somatic mosaicism)
  • Osteoblasts from affected tissue show increased proliferation and differentiation
  • Provides molecular target for potential future therapies

Clinical and Radiological Features of Melorheostosis

Review
Freyschmidt J • Skeletal Radiology (2001)
Key Findings:
  • Dripping candle wax appearance is pathognomonic radiographic finding
  • Sclerotomal distribution is classic but not universal
  • Soft tissue involvement occurs in 50% of cases
  • Pain and stiffness are the predominant clinical features
  • Differential diagnosis includes osteopoikilosis and parosteal osteosarcoma

Bisphosphonate Treatment for Melorheostosis

Case report
Hollick RJ, Black A, Reid DM • Rheumatology (2010)
Key Findings:
  • Zoledronic acid provided significant pain relief in one patient
  • Reduction in bone turnover markers observed
  • No change in radiographic appearance
  • Suggests bisphosphonates may have role in symptom management
  • Limited evidence - case report only

Surgical Treatment Outcomes in Melorheostosis

Case series
Smith GC, Grudziak JS, Guttmann DM, et al. • Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics (2017)
Key Findings:
  • High recurrence rate after soft tissue releases
  • Corrective osteotomies achievable but challenging
  • Multiple procedures often required
  • Aggressive postoperative physiotherapy essential
  • Conservative management remains first-line

Australian Context

Epidemiology in Australia

Melorheostosis is extremely rare worldwide, with an estimated incidence of approximately 1 per million. In Australia, this translates to very few new cases diagnosed annually across the entire country. Most Australian orthopaedic surgeons will encounter only a handful of cases throughout their career, if any.

Healthcare Access and Management

Tertiary Referral Centers:

  • Given the rarity of the condition, patients are best managed at major tertiary hospitals with multidisciplinary bone tumor or musculoskeletal oncology services
  • Access to specialist rheumatology, radiology, and physiotherapy is essential
  • Metropolitan centers in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, and Perth have appropriate expertise

Rural and Remote Considerations:

  • Telehealth consultations with specialists are appropriate for ongoing management
  • Initial diagnosis may occur at regional centers with referral for specialist input
  • Physiotherapy can be coordinated locally with specialist guidance
  • Travel assistance may be available through Patient Assisted Travel Schemes (PATS)

PBS Considerations for Medications

Bisphosphonates:

  • Oral bisphosphonates (alendronate) available on PBS for osteoporosis but use in melorheostosis would be off-label
  • Zoledronic acid available on PBS for specified indications; off-label use may require Special Access Scheme or hospital funding
  • Patients should be counseled regarding off-label use and uncertain efficacy

Analgesics:

  • Standard analgesics (paracetamol, NSAIDs) readily available
  • Gabapentin/pregabalin on PBS for neuropathic pain with appropriate indication
  • Opioid prescribing follows standard Australian guidelines and PBS restrictions

Surgical Considerations

Given the rarity of the condition and high surgical complication rates:

  • Surgery should be performed at centers with experience in complex musculoskeletal conditions
  • Multidisciplinary tumor board or complex case discussion may be valuable
  • Patient expectations should be carefully managed
  • Access to intensive post-operative physiotherapy is essential for optimal outcomes

Viva Practice Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"A 28-year-old woman presents with a 5-year history of progressive right knee stiffness and pain. Radiographs show dense cortical hyperostosis along the medial femur and tibia with a 'dripping candle wax' appearance. How would you assess and manage this patient?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This presentation is classic for melorheostosis. I would take a detailed history focusing on pain characteristics, functional limitations, and symptom progression. Examination would assess range of motion, contractures, skin changes, and limb length. I would confirm the diagnosis with the characteristic radiographic appearance. Additional imaging with MRI would assess soft tissue involvement and rule out other pathology. Management is primarily conservative - NSAIDs for pain, physiotherapy to maintain ROM and prevent contracture progression. I would discuss the condition's natural history (slowly progressive, benign). If contractures are severe and conservative measures fail, I would counsel carefully about surgery, emphasizing the high recurrence rate and risk of postoperative stiffness. Bisphosphonates could be trialed for pain. I would refer to a center with experience in this rare condition.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Recognize classic dripping candle wax radiographic appearance as pathognomonic
Emphasize conservative management as first-line (NSAIDs, physiotherapy)
Understand surgery has high recurrence and complication rates
Know to counsel patient about natural history and expectations
COMMON TRAPS
✗Misdiagnosing as parosteal osteosarcoma (different pattern, lobulated, encircles bone)
✗Recommending early surgical intervention without trial of conservative measures
✗Failing to mention the high surgical recurrence rate when discussing treatment options
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"You are shown a radiograph demonstrating dense cortical sclerosis along one cortex of the femur. What is your differential diagnosis and how would you distinguish between these conditions?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
The differential for dense cortical sclerosis includes: (1) Melorheostosis - characteristic dripping candle wax flowing along one cortex, follows sclerotomal distribution, unilateral; (2) Parosteal osteosarcoma - lobulated mass arising from cortex, tends to encircle bone, may have radiolucent cleft, is a discrete mass not flowing linear pattern; (3) Chronic osteomyelitis - history of infection, involucrum and sequestrum may be present, elevated inflammatory markers; (4) Myositis ossificans - history of trauma, zonal phenomenon with peripheral maturation. To distinguish: history is crucial (chronic progressive course favors melorheostosis), radiographic pattern (dripping wax is pathognomonic for melorheostosis), clinical examination for soft tissue changes. If uncertainty remains, MRI can assess soft tissue, and biopsy would show mature lamellar bone in melorheostosis versus malignant osteoid in osteosarcoma.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
List appropriate differential diagnosis for cortical sclerosis
Describe specific features that distinguish melorheostosis (dripping wax, sclerotomal)
Know parosteal osteosarcoma as key malignant differential
Understand role of history, imaging, and biopsy in diagnosis
COMMON TRAPS
✗Failing to mention parosteal osteosarcoma as a critical differential
✗Not describing the specific dripping candle wax appearance
✗Forgetting to mention biopsy as an option when diagnosis is uncertain
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

EXAMINER

"A patient with melorheostosis affecting the knee has a 45-degree fixed flexion contracture despite 12 months of conservative management. They are requesting surgery. How would you counsel them?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
I would have a detailed discussion about the risks and benefits of surgery for melorheostosis. Key points: (1) Surgery can release the contracture and improve ROM short-term; (2) However, recurrence rates are very high - 50% or more will develop recurrent contracture; (3) Paradoxically, some patients end up with worse stiffness after surgery than before; (4) The underlying disease process continues, and surgery does not halt progression; (5) Intensive postoperative physiotherapy is essential and must be committed to; (6) Multiple procedures may be required over time. If proceeding, I would perform extensive soft tissue release including capsulotomy, with intraoperative assessment of ROM. Immediate postoperative mobilization and CPM would be implemented. I would arrange close follow-up to monitor for recurrence. Alternative approaches like serial casting could be considered. Ultimately, the patient needs to understand this is a chronic condition and surgery is not curative.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Discuss high recurrence rate (50% or more)
Explain surgery does not halt underlying disease
Emphasize importance of postoperative physiotherapy
Counsel about realistic expectations and possible multiple procedures
COMMON TRAPS
✗Being overly optimistic about surgical outcomes
✗Failing to mention recurrence as a common outcome
✗Not discussing alternative conservative options like serial casting

Melorheostosis

High-Yield Exam Summary

Definition and Key Facts

    Molecular Pathogenesis

      Clinical Presentation

        Radiographic Features

          Differential Diagnosis

            Management

              Exam Pearls

                References

                1. Kang H, Jha S, Deng Z, et al. Somatic activating mutations in MAP2K1 cause melorheostosis. Nature Communications. 2018;9(1):1390.
                2. Freyschmidt J. Melorheostosis: a review of 23 cases. European Radiology. 2001;11(3):474-479.
                3. Hollick RJ, Black A, Reid DM. Melorheostosis and its treatment with bisphosphonates. Rheumatology. 2010;49(12):2304-2307.
                4. Smith GC, Grudziak JS, Guttmann DM, et al. Melorheostosis: clinical features, treatment, and outcome. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 2017;37(8):e512-e517.
                5. Hellemans J, Preobrazhenska O, Willaert A, et al. Loss-of-function mutations in LEMD3 result in osteopoikilosis, Buschke-Ollendorff syndrome and melorheostosis. Nature Genetics. 2004;36(11):1213-1218.
                6. Campbell CJ, Papademetriou T, Bonfiglio M. Melorheostosis. A report of the clinical, roentgenographic, and pathological findings in fourteen cases. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 1968;50(7):1281-1304.
                7. Jha S, Fratzl-Zelman N, Engel O, et al. Distinct clinical and pathological features of melorheostosis associated with somatic MAP2K1 mutations. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2019;34(1):145-156.
                8. Whyte MP, Murphy WA, Fallon MD, et al. Mixed-sclerosing-bone-dystrophy: report of a case and review of the literature. Skeletal Radiology. 1981;6(2):95-102.
                Quick Stats
                Reading Time91 min
                Related Topics

                Pyknodysostosis

                Atypical Mycobacterial Infection

                Fungal Osteomyelitis

                Prosthetic Limb Components