Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Publication Date: | 2020 |
Other Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | eng |
Source: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Download full: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2622 |
Summary: | Purpose: Primary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous tumour. En bloc resection, in contrast to intralesional resection, is the only procedure able to provide Enneking appropriate (EA) margins, which has improved local control and survival of patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of local recurrence, metastases development and survival in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine submitted to Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI) procedures. Methods: A systematic search was performed on EBSCO, PubMed and Web of Science, between 1966 and 2018, to identify studies evaluating patients submitted to resection of primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Two reviewers independently assessed all reports. The outcomes were local recurrence, metastases development and survival at 12, 24 and 60 months. Results: Five studies (108 patients) were included for systematic review. These studies support the conclusion that EA procedure has a lower local recurrence rate (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17-0.66), a lower metastases development rate (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89) and a higher survival rate at 24 months (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.24-2.55) and 60 months (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42) of follow-up; however, at 12 months, there is a non-significant difference. Conclusions: EA procedure increases the ratio of remission and survival after 24 months of follow-up. Multidisciplinary oncologic groups should weigh the morbidity of an en bloc resection, knowing that in the first year the probability of survival is the same for EA and EI procedures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. |
id |
RCAP_53889374d9de6b1e4081dee01afa727d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2622 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysisEnneking marginsLocal recurrenceMetastatic diseaseOsteosarcomaPrimary spine tumoursSurvivalPurpose: Primary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous tumour. En bloc resection, in contrast to intralesional resection, is the only procedure able to provide Enneking appropriate (EA) margins, which has improved local control and survival of patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of local recurrence, metastases development and survival in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine submitted to Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI) procedures. Methods: A systematic search was performed on EBSCO, PubMed and Web of Science, between 1966 and 2018, to identify studies evaluating patients submitted to resection of primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Two reviewers independently assessed all reports. The outcomes were local recurrence, metastases development and survival at 12, 24 and 60 months. Results: Five studies (108 patients) were included for systematic review. These studies support the conclusion that EA procedure has a lower local recurrence rate (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17-0.66), a lower metastases development rate (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89) and a higher survival rate at 24 months (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.24-2.55) and 60 months (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42) of follow-up; however, at 12 months, there is a non-significant difference. Conclusions: EA procedure increases the ratio of remission and survival after 24 months of follow-up. Multidisciplinary oncologic groups should weigh the morbidity of an en bloc resection, knowing that in the first year the probability of survival is the same for EA and EI procedures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.Springer-VerlagRepositório Científico do Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo AntónioPombo, BrunoCristina Ferreira, AnaCardoso, PedroOliveira, António2021-11-23T14:08:34Z20202020-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2622engPombo B, Cristina Ferreira A, Cardoso P, Oliveira A. Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2020;29(2):238-247. doi:10.1007/s00586-019-06099-70940-671910.1007/s00586-019-06099-7info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-10-20T11:01:21Zoai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2622Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:38:49.446938Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
title |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
spellingShingle |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis Pombo, Bruno Enneking margins Local recurrence Metastatic disease Osteosarcoma Primary spine tumours Survival |
title_short |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
title_full |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
title_sort |
Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis |
author |
Pombo, Bruno |
author_facet |
Pombo, Bruno Cristina Ferreira, Ana Cardoso, Pedro Oliveira, António |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Cristina Ferreira, Ana Cardoso, Pedro Oliveira, António |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico do Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Santo António |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pombo, Bruno Cristina Ferreira, Ana Cardoso, Pedro Oliveira, António |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Enneking margins Local recurrence Metastatic disease Osteosarcoma Primary spine tumours Survival |
topic |
Enneking margins Local recurrence Metastatic disease Osteosarcoma Primary spine tumours Survival |
description |
Purpose: Primary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous tumour. En bloc resection, in contrast to intralesional resection, is the only procedure able to provide Enneking appropriate (EA) margins, which has improved local control and survival of patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine. The objective of this study is to compare the risk of local recurrence, metastases development and survival in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine submitted to Enneking appropriate (EA) and Enneking inappropriate (EI) procedures. Methods: A systematic search was performed on EBSCO, PubMed and Web of Science, between 1966 and 2018, to identify studies evaluating patients submitted to resection of primary osteosarcoma of the spine. Two reviewers independently assessed all reports. The outcomes were local recurrence, metastases development and survival at 12, 24 and 60 months. Results: Five studies (108 patients) were included for systematic review. These studies support the conclusion that EA procedure has a lower local recurrence rate (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17-0.66), a lower metastases development rate (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89) and a higher survival rate at 24 months (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.24-2.55) and 60 months (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42) of follow-up; however, at 12 months, there is a non-significant difference. Conclusions: EA procedure increases the ratio of remission and survival after 24 months of follow-up. Multidisciplinary oncologic groups should weigh the morbidity of an en bloc resection, knowing that in the first year the probability of survival is the same for EA and EI procedures. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z 2021-11-23T14:08:34Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2622 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2622 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Pombo B, Cristina Ferreira A, Cardoso P, Oliveira A. Clinical effectiveness of Enneking appropriate versus Enneking inappropriate procedure in patients with primary osteosarcoma of the spine: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2020;29(2):238-247. doi:10.1007/s00586-019-06099-7 0940-6719 10.1007/s00586-019-06099-7 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Springer-Verlag |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Springer-Verlag |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799133648486662144 |