ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2025
Advances in Surgical Management of Malignant Tumors of the Distal Tibia.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
opinion statementMalignant tumors of the distal tibia are rare and pose unique reconstructive challenges due to the region's complex anatomical and biomechanical characteristics. Contemporary treatment has progressively shifted from amputation to limb salvage. We believe that a favorable histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the absence of major neurovascular involvement are key prerequisites for successful limb salvage. Amputation is generally considered a salvage option when limb salvage fails. In adults, we typically favor biological reconstruction combined with ankle arthrodesis as the first-line approach. For smaller defects, either allograft or distraction osteogenesis is recommended. For larger defects, we advocate for the use of recycled tumor-bearing autograft combined with fibular grafting. Non-biological reconstruction may be appropriate for patients who require immediate stability and early weight-bearing, but it is not recommended for patients with a life expectancy of several decades due to rising complication rates and progressive functional deterioration. For end-stage patients, the focus shifts to improving quality of life. We prefer simpler surgical procedures combined with nonsurgical oncologic care. In pediatric patients, preservation of the growth plate and joint is prioritized whenever oncologically safe. If preservation is not possible, a conventional non-expandable prosthesis is appropriate when the predicted limb-length discrepancy at skeletal maturity is less than 2 cm. Physeal distraction or an expandable prosthesis is preferred when the discrepancy is larger. Preoperatively, MRI and PET-CT are used for precise evaluation, along with multidisciplinary fracture risk prediction methods for fracture risk stratification. Intraoperatively, fluorescence guidance and computer assistance can enhance resection and reconstruction accuracy. However, several of these adjuncts remain under investigation. Ultimately, we individualize the surgical plan according to the patient's preferences while respecting local regulations and cultural or religious considerations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41082052What 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.