ArticleBMC women's health2015
Management of musculoskeletal tumors during pregnancy: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC women's health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Jaw osteosarcoma and pregnancy: a rare coexistence.Autopsy & case reports · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, scientific research has increasingly focused on malignancies during pregnancy. However, the development of musculoskeletal tumors during pregnancy has only been the subject of a few studies so far. The primary aim of this study was to identify the incidence of sarcomas during pregnancy at our musculoskeletal tumor center (MSTC). Secondarily we intended to analyze these cases and discuss possible recommendations regarding diagnostic work-up as well as therapy on the basis of the literature.
methodsAll female patients who had been treated for soft tissue or bone sarcoma at our academic MSTC in the period between the years 2002 and 2010 were screened retrospectively for anamnestic annotations of pregnancy or records of pregnancy in the obstetrical database of our university hospital. The patients who met the criteria for inclusion (diagnosed sarcoma and pregnancy) were enrolled. For every pregnant patient two age-matched female control patients that suffered from tumors with the same histologic type were included.
resultsIn the period between 2002 and 2010, 240 female patients between the age of 16 and 45 were treated for sarcoma. In eight out of the 240 cases the tumor disease developed or progressed during pregnancy. The delay in diagnosis was approximately eight months and turned out to be significantly higher for pregnant patients compared to non- pregnant controls. Each woman's tumor was misdiagnosed at least once.
conclusionsDiagnostic follow-up of pregnant women presenting with a growing or painful mass, which is suspected to be a musculoskeletal tumor, should be performed at a specialized tumor center. We recommend a multidisciplinary approach and discussing all possible consequences for mother and child intensively in accordance with the available literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.