Recent Developments in the Surgical Treatment of Bone Tumors and Their Impact on Quality of Life

Mavrogenis, Andreas F.; Lenze, Ulrich; Rechl, H.; Letson, G. Douglas; Ruggieri, Pietro

doi:10.1155/2013/826432

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent advancements in neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, enhanced diagnostic imaging, improved surgical techniques, and the development of newer tumor prostheses have aided in this change [9,[19][20][21]. Recently, the standard of surgical care has also changed from limb amputation or resection-arthrodesis to limb salvage [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limb Salvage Versus Amputation in Conventional Appendicular Osteosarcoma: a Systematic Review

Jauregui

Nadarajah

Munn

et al. 2018

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The overall survivorship in patients with appendicular osteosarcoma has increased in the past few decades. However, controversies and questions about performing an amputation or a limb salvage procedure still remain. Using three peer-reviewed library databases, a systematic review of the literature was performed to evaluate all studies that have evaluated the outcomes of appendicular osteosarcoma, either with limb salvage or amputation. The mean 5-year overall survivorship was 62% for salvage and 58% for amputation ( > 0.05). At mean 6-year follow-up, the local recurrence rates were 8.2% for salvage and 3.0% for amputation ( > 0.05). Additionally, at mean 6-year follow-up, the rate for metastasis was 33% for salvage and 38% for amputation ( > 0.05). The revision rates were higher with salvage (31 vs. 28%), and there were more complications in the salvage groups (52 vs. 34%; > 0.05). Despite the heterogeneity of studies available for review, we observed similar survival rates between the two procedures. Although there was no significant statistical difference between rates of recurrence and metastasis, the local recurrence rate and risk of complications were higher for limb salvage as compared to amputation. Cosmetic satisfaction is often higher with limb salvage, whereas long-term expense is higher with amputation. Overall, current literature supports limb salvage procedures when wide surgical margins can be achieved while still retaining a functional limb.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limb Salvage Versus Amputation in Conventional Appendicular Osteosarcoma: a Systematic Review

Jauregui

Nadarajah

Munn

et al. 2018

Indian J Surg Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different factors decide the type of surgery to be performed. A limb-salvage surgery is preferred when it is possible to obtain negative margins through a wide-margin resection (4). Relative and absolute contraindications to limb-salvage surgery, such as neurovascular compromise, pathological fracture with hematoma extended beyond compartment boundaries, errant biopsy placement, tissue coverage problems, or severe infections in the surgical site, direct the decision to performing an amputational surgery (5).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Factors Define Limb Salvage or Amputation Surgery in Osteosarcoma of the Upper Extremities?

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aim: Controversy exists between performing limb salvage or amputation to treat osteosarcoma of the upper extremities. Our aim was to review the characteristics associated with limb amputation due to osteosarcoma of the upper extremities. Patients and Methods: A descriptive study was performed by querying the National Cancer Database from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2015. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-squared test and a multivariate logistic regression model. Results: A total of 777 patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma of the upper extremities who underwent surgery met the inclusion criteria. Patients between 61 and 80 years were less likely to undergo limb amputation. Moreover, facilities located in the South Atlantic region, and stage IV of the disease were factors independently positively associated with amputation. Conclusion: Patients in facilities located in the South Atlantic region and those with stage IV disease were more likely to undergo amputation.

show abstract

Delayed Diagnosis Is the Primary Cause of Sarcoma Litigation: Analysis of Malpractice Claims in the United States

Hwang

Park

Sheppard

et al. 2020

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Sarcoma care is highly litigated in medical malpractice claims. Understanding the reasons for litigation and legal outcomes in sarcoma care may help physicians deliver more effective and satisfying care to patients while limiting their legal exposure. However, few studies have described malpractice litigation in sarcoma care. Questions/purposes:(1) What percentage of sarcoma malpractice cases result in a defendant verdict? (2) What is the median indemnity payment for cases that result in a plaintiff verdict or settlement? (3) What are the most common reasons for litigation, injuries sustained, and medical specialties of the defendant physicians? (4) What are the factors associated with plaintiff verdicts or settlements and higher indemnity payments?

show abstract

Recent Developments in the Surgical Treatment of Bone Tumors and Their Impact on Quality of Life

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Limb Salvage Versus Amputation in Conventional Appendicular Osteosarcoma: a Systematic Review

Limb Salvage Versus Amputation in Conventional Appendicular Osteosarcoma: a Systematic Review

What Factors Define Limb Salvage or Amputation Surgery in Osteosarcoma of the Upper Extremities?

Delayed Diagnosis Is the Primary Cause of Sarcoma Litigation: Analysis of Malpractice Claims in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About