Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34988016›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Comparative Analysis of Two Surgical Treatment Options for Giant Cell Tumor of the Proximal Femur: Extended Curettage and Segmental Resection.

Yuhao Yuan, Qing Liu, Yupeng Liu, Ziyi Wu, Wei Zhong, Hongbo He, Wei Luo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Clinical Outcomes of CurettageRevista brasileira de ortopedia · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuhao YuanDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Qing LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Yupeng LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Ziyi WuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Wei ZhongDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Hongbo HeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Wei LuoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Central South University · CNXiangya Hospital Central South University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimAs a locally destructive intermediate bone tumor with low incidence, high recurrence rate, and difficulty in reconstruction, giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the proximal femur has no unified surgical treatment standard. This study aimed to compare the differences in local recurrence, reconstruction durability, and postoperative function after treatment with either extended curettage (EC) or segmental resection (SR) for GCTB in the proximal femur so as to provide constructive suggestions for the rational selection of EC or SR operation scheme. PATIENTS AND

methods29 patients (15 men and 14 women) were included in this retrospective study, with a mean age of 32.1 years. According to the division method of proximal femur of International Society Of Limb Salvage (ISOLS), there was 1 case in the H1 area, 17 cases in the H2 area, 10 cases in the H1+H2 area, and 1 case in the H1+H2+H3 area. Among them were 11 cases of Campanacci grade II GCTB, 18 cases of Campanacci grade III GCTB, and 7 cases with pathological fractures. All patients underwent either EC or SR surgery. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was used for patient evaluation. The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. Regular follow-up was performed to evaluate the recurrence rate, limb function, and long-term complications of the two surgical methods.

resultsAll patients were followed up for a mean of 60.4 months. Local recurrence occurred in one of 19 patients treated with EC (5.3%) and one of 10 patients treated with SR (10%). The MSTS score of lower limb function in patients in the EC group was better compared to patients in the SR group (P = 0.002). Complications occurred in 2 cases (10.5%) and 5 cases (50%) in the EC group (osteoarthritis, osteonecrosis) and SR group (joint stiffness, infection, prosthesis loosening), respectively, with significant differences between the two groups (P = 0.03). The operation effectiveness was analyzed according to the Mankin evaluation standard. The EC group showed an optimal rate of 94.7% (18/19) as opposed to 80% (8/10) in the SR group.

conclusionsFor GCTB in the proximal femur, when the tumor does not extensively involves the surrounding soft tissues, the articular surface was not damaged, and there is no pathological fracture with apparent displacement, EC surgery should be fully considered.

Indexed as

extended curettagegiant cell tumor of boneproximal femursegment resectionsurgical options

Identifiers

PMID34988016
PMCPMC8720996
OpenAlexW4200290777

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.