ArticleJournal of bone oncology2026
Feasibility and oncologic outcome of en resection with intentional tumor transgression in primary spinal sarcoma: The Korean Society of Spinal Tumors multicenter study (KSST 2024-02).
Article in Journal of bone oncology, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Primary spinal sarcoma is rare and technically challenging, particularly when attempting en bloc resection with negative margins. Intentional tumor transgression may be used when Enneking-appropriate en bloc resection is not feasible, but its oncologic implications remain unclear. This study evaluated the feasibility and outcomes of en bloc resection with intentional tumor transgression compared with other resection strategies. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients who underwent surgery for primary spinal sarcoma across five tertiary hospitals from 2000 to 2022. Patients were grouped by resection method: (A) en bloc resection with negative margins, (B) en bloc resection with intentional tumor transgression, (C) piecemeal resection, and (D) subtotal resection. Tumor extent was assessed using a modified Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini classification. The primary outcome was overall survival; secondary outcomes included local recurrence, distant metastasis, and perioperative complications. Results: The study included 119 patients (mean age 46.0 ± 19.8 years). Oncological outcomes (overall survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis) demonstrated significant trends in survival analysis across groups A to D. Although Group B had more extensive disease (>3 quadrants, canal encroachment, multi-level involvement), its overall survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis did not differ significantly from Group A (hazard ratio [HR] 0.54, p = 0.467; HR 0.46, p = 0.307; HR 0.46, p = 0.237, respectively). Complication rates were comparable between groups A and B. Conclusion: En bloc resection with intentional tumor transgression offers oncologic outcomes comparable to margin-negative en bloc resection in selected patients with more extensive tumors. This technique may be a viable alternative when Enneking-appropriate en bloc resection is not feasible.
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.