Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28086937›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2017

A meta-analysis of randomized control trials of surgical methods with osteosarcoma outcomes.

Xiaojun He, Zhenzhen Gao, Hongwei Xu, Zhongwei Zhang, Peng Fu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Fifty years of bone tumors.Journal of surgical oncology · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaojun HeDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing College, 1518 Huancheng Rd, 314000, Jiaxing, China.
Zhenzhen GaoDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing College, Jiaxing, China.
Hongwei XuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing College, 1518 Huancheng Rd, 314000, Jiaxing, China.
Zhongwei ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing College, 1518 Huancheng Rd, 314000, Jiaxing, China.
Peng FuDepartment of Orthopedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing College, 1518 Huancheng Rd, 314000, Jiaxing, China. fupeng24@163.com.
Jiaxing University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOsteosarcoma is a high malignant neoplasm, and conflicting findings have been reported on the survival and function recovery of osteosarcoma patients experiencing limb salvage or amputation. In the present study, we compared limb salvage surgery (LSS) with amputation in clinical outcomes of osteosarcoma patients by a meta-analysis.

methodsThe survival rate of osteosarcoma patients was collected from research reports from CNKI, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar till April 30, 2016. The quality of including articles was evaluated by two independent reviewers. Differences between patients undergoing limb salvage surgery and amputation were analyzed based on postoperative survival rates.

resultsTen articles were included according to selection criteria. There were 1343 patients in total from these studies. Our results showed that there was no significant difference between limb salvage surgery and amputation according to local recurrence; however, patients with limb salvage surgery had a higher 5-year overall survival.

conclusionsLSS results in higher 5-year survival rates and better survival, while not increasing the risk of local recurrence. This study provided more evidences to support limb salvage surgery as a considerable treatment of osteosarcoma patients.

Indexed as

Amputation, SurgicalBone NeoplasmsHumansLimb SalvageNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalOsteosarcomaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSalvage TherapySurvival RateTreatment Outcome5-year overall survivalAmputationLimb salvage surgeryLocal recurrenceMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID28086937
PMCPMC5237271
OpenAlexW2577728446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.