Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32911853›Full record

ArticleCancers2020

The Effect of Resection Margin on Local Recurrence and Survival in High Grade Soft Tissue Sarcoma of the Extremities: How Far Is Far Enough?

Annika Bilgeri, Alexander Klein, Lars H Lindner, Silke Nachbichler, Thomas Knösel, Christof Birkenmaier, Volkmar Jansson, Andrea Baur-Melnyk, Hans Roland Dürr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors.

Annika BilgeriMusculoskeletal Oncology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.
Alexander KleinMusculoskeletal Oncology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.
Lars H LindnerDepartment of Medicine III, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3708-8264
Silke NachbichlerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3860-5235
Thomas KnöselInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.
Christof BirkenmaierMusculoskeletal Oncology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1632-3616
Volkmar JanssonMusculoskeletal Oncology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.
Andrea Baur-MelnykDepartment of Radiology, University Hospital LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.
Hans Roland DürrMusculoskeletal Oncology, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital, LMU 80539 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1347-1173

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe significance of surgical margins after resection of soft tissue sarcomas in respect to local-recurrence-free survival and overall survival is evaluated.

methodsA total of 305 patients with deep-seated, G2/3 soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the extremity, the trunk wall, or the pelvis were reviewed. The margin was defined according to the Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer (FNCLCC) classification system (R0-2), the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) classification (R + 1 mm) for which a margin <1 mm is included into the R1 group, and in groups of <1 mm, 1-5 mm, >5 mm, or >10 mm.

resultsOf these patients, 31 (10.2%) had a contaminated margin, 64 (21%) a margin of <1 mm, 123 (40.3%) a margin of 1-5 mm, 47 (15.4%) a margin of >5 mm, and 40 (13.1%) a margin of >10 mm. The 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 81.6%. Overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 65.9%. Positive margins worsened LRFS and OS. A margin of >10 mm did not improve LRFS and OS as compared to one of >5 mm.

conclusionsA resection margin of <1 mm showed a trend but not significantly better LRFS or OS compared to a contaminated margin. This finding supports use of the UICC classification. A margin of more than 10 mm did not improve LRFS or OS.

Indexed as

classificationmarginsrisksarcomasurgery

Identifiers

PMID32911853
PMCPMC7563962

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.