Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32239356›Full record

ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2020

En bloc resection in patients younger than 16 years affected by primary spine tumors: indications, results and complications in a series of 22 patients.

Alessandro Luzzati, Gennaro Scotto, Luca Cannavò, Alessandra Scotto di Uccio, Giuseppe Orlando, Luisa Petriello, Carmine Zoccali

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Tumors and infections of the growing spine.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Alessandro LuzzatiOncological and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, IRCCS - Galeazzi Orhopedic Institute, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Gennaro ScottoOncological and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, IRCCS - Galeazzi Orhopedic Institute, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Luca CannavòOncological and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, IRCCS - Galeazzi Orhopedic Institute, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Alessandra Scotto di UccioOncological Orthopedics Department, IRCCS - Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi 53, 00144, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe OrlandoOncological and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, IRCCS - Galeazzi Orhopedic Institute, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, Italy.
Luisa PetrielloOrthopedics and Traumatology Department, La Sapienza University, Policlinico Umberto I, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185, Rome, Italy.
Carmine ZoccaliOncological Orthopedics Department, IRCCS - Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi 53, 00144, Rome, Italy. carminezoccali@libero.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeReview a series of 22 patients below the age of 16 affected by primary bone tumors of the spine who underwent en bloc resection, and describe the clinical presentation, tumor characteristics, results and complications associated with the surgical treatment, underlining the specific issues related to a younger age.

methodsWe performed a review of all patients < 16 years old affected by primary bone tumors of the spine, surgically treated with en bloc resection from 1996 to 2016. Clinical and radiological characteristics, therapy, complications and survival are reported.

resultsOnly 12/22 cases had not been previously treated. 22.7% experienced at least one early complication; 18.2% and 4.1% experienced at least 2 and ≥ 3 early complications, respectively; 40.9% experienced at least one late complication, often related to hardware failure (27.3%); 18.2% and 4.5% at least 2 and ≥ 3 late complications. No early nor late complications were experienced in 12 out of 22 patients (54.54%). The overall survival and the local recurrence-free survival at 5 years were, respectively, 79.5% and 74.8%; considering only the patients with high-grade tumors, they were 70.9% and 65.5%, respectively. At 77.3 months of median follow-up, 17 patients are still alive, 16 of whom without any evidence of disease and 1 with evidence of local and systemic disease; four patients died with evidence of local disease and one with distant metastases but no local recurrence.

conclusionsYoung people with primary malignant or locally aggressive bone tumors of the spine should be treated in specialized centers, and wide surgery should be performed. The most frequent problems are related to reconstruction in a growing spine and subsequent hardware failure that make later surgeries necessary. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Indexed as

Spinal NeoplasmsEquipment FailureHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesSpineTreatment OutcomeEn bloc spondylectomyGrowing spineHardware failurePediatric spinal bone tumorsPediatric spine

Identifiers

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.