Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24658873›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2014

Customised osteotomy guides and endoprosthetic reconstruction for periacetabular tumours.

Boris Michael Holzapfel, Hakan Pilge, Peter Michael Prodinger, Andreas Toepfer, Susanne Mayer-Wagner, Dietmar Werner Hutmacher, Ruediger von Eisenhart-Rothe, Maximilian Rudert, Reiner Gradinger, Hans Rechl

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Patient-Specific Implants for Pelvic Tumor Resections.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Boris Michael Holzapfel
Hakan Pilge
Peter Michael Prodinger
Andreas Toepfer
Susanne Mayer-Wagner
Dietmar Werner Hutmacher
Ruediger von Eisenhart-Rothe
Maximilian Rudert
Reiner Gradinger
Hans Rechl
Technical University of Munich · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEKlinikum rechts der Isar · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe sought to analyse clinical and oncological outcomes of patients after guided resection of periacetabular tumours and endoprosthetic reconstruction of the remaining defect.

methodsFrom 1988 to 2008, we treated 56 consecutive patients (mean age 52.5 years, 41.1 % women). Patients were followed up either until death or February 2011 (mean follow up 5.5 years, range 0.1-22.5, standard deviation ± 5.3). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate survival rates.

resultsDisease-specific survival was 59.9 % at five years and 49.7 % at ten and 20 years, respectively. Wide resection margins were achieved in 38 patients, whereas 11 patients underwent marginal and seven intralesional resection. Survival was significantly better in patients with wide or marginal resection than in patients with intralesional resection (p = 0.022). Survival for patients with secondary tumours was significantly worse than for patients with primary tumours (p = 0.003). In 29 patients (51.8 %), at least one reoperation was necessary, resulting in a revision-free survival of 50.5 % at five years, 41.1 % at ten years and 30.6 % at 20 years. Implant survival was 77.0 % at five years, 68.6 % at ten years and 51.8 % at 20 years. A total of 35 patients (62.5 %) experienced one or more complications after surgery. Ten of 56 patients (17.9 %) experienced local recurrence after a mean of 8.9 months. The mean postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was 18.1 (60.1 %).

conclusionThe surgical approach assessed in this study simplifies the process of tumour resection and prosthesis implantation and leads to acceptable clinical and oncological outcomes.

Indexed as

AcetabulumAdolescentAdultAgedBone NeoplasmsFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMaleMiddle AgedOsteotomyPlastic Surgery ProceduresProsthesis DesignProsthesis ImplantationSarcomaSurgery, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID24658873
PMCPMC4071499
OpenAlexW2034410090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.