There are many unanswered questions about giant cell tumor (GCT) treatment and not enough attention is paid to the biomechanics of the current treatment methods. Treatment methods have not changed much, and the best method remains controversial to some degree, due to the lack of adequate clinical and biomechanical investigations. Biomechanical tests, including in vitro mechanical experiments combined with finite element analysis, are very helpful in assessing the efficiency of the surgical methods employed and in determining the optimal method of surgery. Tests can be tailored to meet a patient's needs, while limiting postoperative complications. One of the complications, following tumor surgery, is the frequency of postoperative fractures. In order to prevent postoperative fractures, defect reconstruction is recommended. The reconstruction usually consists of defect infilling with bone cement, and in the case of large defects cement augmentation is employed. Whether cement augmentation is essential and offers enough mechanical strength and what is the best fixation device for cement augmentation are areas of debate. In this article, the biomechanical studies comparing different methods of tumor surgery and cement augmentation, highlighting the areas needing more attention to advance GCT treatment, are critically reviewed. Based on our review, we recommend a biomechanical criterion for the essence of defect reconstruction, which must include patient specific factors, in addition to the tumor geometrical properties.