ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Plastic and reconstructive surgery in spinal sarcoma resection: a review of indications, techniques, and outcomes.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSoft-tissue reconstruction following oncologic resection of spinal tumors often leaves extensive dead space vulnerable to infection, cerebrospinal fluid leak, and impaired function. En bloc resection with wide margins remains standard for disease control, but closure of these complex defects is challenging. Plastic and reconstructive surgeons (PRS) are often consulted for soft-tissue closure, yet their role in spinal sarcoma care has not been comprehensively reviewed. We aimed to (1) describe indications and timing of PRS consultation, (2) summarize reconstructive options by anatomic site, and (3) report outcome differences where comparative data were available.
methodsFollowing PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we performed a scoping review of Scopus, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases (January 2000-April 2025). Eligible studies reported spinal sarcoma or mixed oncologic spine cohorts with extractable sarcoma data undergoing flap-based or microvascular reconstruction with postoperative outcome data.
resultsWe included 21 primary studies encompassing 10,854 patients and four secondary sources; two additional narrative reviews published after the original search period were incorporated as contextual sources. PRS teams primarily employed flap-based closure in higher-risk patients, including those with prior irradiation, infection, large posterior defects, or multilevel instrumentation. In comparative observational cohorts, immediate flap-based closure was associated with lower wound complication rates and fewer hardware-related complications. Sacral and chest wall tumors were most anatomically complex, frequently requiring PRS consultation.
conclusionPRS involvement is preferentially utilized in higher-risk settings and is associated with comparable or lower wound morbidity, supporting early PRS consultation when high-risk features are present. These findings support standardized multidisciplinary consultation pathways and future validation of risk stratification tools in this patient population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42472393What 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.