ReviewJournal of bone oncology2023
Surgical margin assessment of bone tumours: A systematic review of current and emerging technologies.
Review in Journal of bone oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Bone Metastasis Management: A Narrative Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Research Progress on the Evaluation and Clinical Value of Negative Surgical Margins in Osteosarcoma.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2026Review
- Malignant Bone and Soft Tissue Lesions of the Foot.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osteosarcoma is the most common malignant tumour of the bone. Complete surgical excision is critical to achieve optimal outcomes and lower recurrence rates. However, accurate assessment of tumour margins remains a challenge and multiple technologies are employed for this purpose. The aim of this study is to highlight current and emerging technologies and their efficacy in detecting clear bone margins intraoperatively, through a systematic review of the literature. The following databases were searched using the OVID platform: Medline, Embase, Global Health and Google Scholar. Studies were screened using predetermined eligibility criteria. Data was extracted based on study and patient characteristics, modes of detection, and commercial availability, followed by quality assessment. A total of 17 studies were included. The primary diagnosis varied, with osteosarcoma being reported by 9 studies. Three studies reported relapse, ranging between 17.6%-48%. Twelve studies reported non-invasive imaging as the mode of detection used, while 4 studies reported the use of frozen section. MRI and CT were found to have an accuracy of up to 93 %. Raman spectroscopy was reported to have an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 69%, 58.8% and 83.3% respectively. CT had a sensitivity and specificity up to 83% and 100%, respectively. In conclusion, there seems to be high potential for the use of multimodal technologies to increase the accuracy of intraoperative margin assessment. Although imaging modalities possess a fair level of accuracy, they carry the risk of radiation exposure, are expensive, and cannot be used in-situ. Future clinical trials are needed to test the effectiveness of these technologies to measure the diagnostic accuracy and overall patient survival.
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.