ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2026
Pelvic resections in primary sarcomas : Surgical outcomes and survival analysis of 75 patients.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to compare the complication rate, local recurrence and survival of different types of pelvic resections. Special interest is to compare the results from external and internal hemipelvectomies if the iliac wing resections are separately evaluated, as they are usually easier to operate and do not need any reconstruction, therefore they might disfigure the results from internal hemipelvectomy in positive direction, if involved in the same group.
methodsThis non-randomized retrospective study included 75 cases with a mean follow-up time of 6.9 years. We divided them to three groups according to the type of surgery (external and internal hemipelvectomy, iliac wing resection). The oncological stages, surgical margins, local recurrences, complications and the survival rates were recorded for statistical analyses.
resultsA wide surgical margin (R0) was achieved in 73.3% after external hemipelvectomy, 47.6% after internal hemipelvectomy and 77.8% after iliac wing resection. We did not find significant differences in rates of local recurrence between the groups: the lowest was recorded after external hemipelvectomy (26.7%) and there was no difference between internal hemipelvectomy and iliac wing resection (33.3%). The 5‑year survival was 26.7% in external hemipelvectomy, 35.7% in internal hemipelvectomy and 61.1% for iliac wing resection. Cox regression analysis identified negative prognostic factors for survival as histological grade, local recurrence and patient's age but not the type of surgery.
conclusionInternal hemipelvectomy is as safe a procedure as the external hemipelvectomy concerning 5‑year survival, complications and local recurrence, even if iliac wing resections are excluded from this group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42371039What 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.