ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Outcomes of Limb Salvage Surgery Versus Amputation in Osteosarcoma: A Five-Year Follow-Up Study From a Tertiary Care Center.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Routine Laboratory Biomarkers for Survival Prediction After Limb-Salvage Surgery in Osteosarcoma: Development of a LASSO-Cox Prognostic Model and Internal Validation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe most prevalent primary malignant bone tumor that affects teenagers and young adults is osteosarcoma. Limb salvage surgery (LSS) has replaced amputation as the surgical treatment of choice, but still, there is a dearth of comparison data from low- and middle-income environments.
objectiveTo compare the outcomes of limb salvage surgery versus amputation in patients with osteosarcoma over five years. METHODOLOGY: The Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Lady Reading Hospital/MTI, Peshawar, Pakistan, carried out this retrospective comparative study during five years (2018-2023). In all, 61 patients with histologically verified non-metastatic osteosarcoma had either amputation (n=24) or limb salvage surgery (n=37). Data on therapy, histopathology, clinical, and demographics were examined. The EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was used to measure quality of life, and the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was used to measure functional outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze survival.
resultsLSS patients had a significantly higher five-year survival rate (83.8%) compared to amputation (62.5%; p=0.048). Functional scores (MSTS) and quality of life (QLQ-C30) were markedly better in the LSS group (p=0.002). Local recurrence and surgical complications were comparable between groups. Surgical margins were more frequently negative in the LSS group (p=0.031).
conclusionLimb salvage surgery suggested a clear advantage in terms of survival, limb function, and quality of life without increasing recurrence or complications. These findings support wider adoption of LSS in appropriately selected osteosarcoma patients, even within resource-constrained healthcare environments.
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.