ArticleBone & joint research2025
Development and clinical application of extendable prostheses in limb salvage surgery for primary malignant bone tumours in children : a systematic review of functional outcomes and complications.
Article in Bone & joint research, 2025. 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.
- What's new in pediatric bone sarcomas and benign bone tumors.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Enhancing precision in limb-salvage surgery : proof-of-concept study of an innovative multifunctional patient-specific guide.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Advances in Surgical Management of Malignant Tumors of the Distal Tibia.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aims: Extendable prostheses have developed rapidly over the decades to solve limb length discrepancy (LLD) following limb salvage surgery in children and adolescents who have suffered primary malignant bone tumours. In this study, we performed a systematic review of the literature on extendable prostheses to investigate their developments and clinical outcomes, to provide evidence-based recommendations for enhancing clinical implementation and refinement. Methods: A systematic review of 46 studies with 709 invasive cases and 556 noninvasive cases was performed after searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases. Results of the prosthesis survival rate, functional outcomes, and complications were extracted, recategorized, and analyzed. Results: With the increase in publication year, there was no significant change in the five-year prosthesis survival rate, while the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) score exhibited an upward trend. Apart from infection, the incidence of mechanical complications increased as follow-up time extended. Failed structure of invasive prosthesis was higher than in those who received a noninvasive extendable prosthesis (25.1% (123/491) vs 15.0% (70/466); p < 0.001, Power = 0.972). The mean number of additional procedures in patients who received an invasive prosthesis was higher than those who received a noninvasive extendable prosthesis (2.4 (1.3 to 3.4) vs 1.4 (0.1 to 2.7); p = 0.021), and there was no obvious clinical difference between invasive prostheses and noninvasive prostheses in infection (15.0% (88/586) vs 13.4% (68/508); p = 0.442, Power = 0.125). Infection (44/361, 12.2%) was the most common complication associated with the Stanmore JTS prosthesis, while the incidence of aseptic loosening (14/296, 4.7%) was the lowest. The mean incidence of complications in the Stanmore Mark I-IV group was higher than that in the Stanmore JTS group (68.9% (104/151) vs 36.6% (49/134); p < 0.001, Power = 0.9998). Conclusion: Despite decades of progress, extendable prostheses have shown promising results but still face challenges such as high infection rates, requiring further technological innovation for better outcomes.
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.