Literature DB >> 20213405

Functional, psychosocial and professional outcomes in long-term survivors of lower-extremity osteosarcomas: amputation versus limb salvage.

Giulia Ottaviani1, Rhonda S Robert, Winston W Huh, Norman Jaffe.   

Abstract

As the number of osteosarcoma survivors increases, the impact of quality of life and function needs to be addressed. Limb salvage is the preferred treatment when patients have treatment options; yet, the questionable long-term durability and complications of prostheses, combined with ambiguous function, leave some doubt regarding the best clinical and surgical options. Comparisons between limb salvage patients, amputees and controls also require further investigation. Amputation would leave the patients with a lifelong requirement for an external prosthetic leg associated with an overall limited walking distance. While artificial limbs are much more sophisticated than those used in the past, phantom limb sensations remain a substantial and unpredictable problem in the amputee. Complications such as stump overgrowth, bleeding, and infection, also require further elucidation. Limb salvage surgery using endoprosthesis, allografts or reconstruction is performed in approximately 85% of patients affected by osteosarcoma located in the middle and/or distal femur. One drawback in limb-salvage surgery in the long-term survivor is that endoprostheses have a limited life span with long-term prosthetic failure. The inherent high rate of reoperation remains a serious problem. Replacing a damaged, infected or severely worn-out arthroplastic joint or its intramedullary stem is difficult, especially in the long-stem cemented endoprostheses used in the 1980s. Limb lengthening procedures in patients who have not reached maturity must also be addressed. Periprosthetic infections, compared to other indications for joint reconstruction, were found to be more frequent in patients treated for neoplastic conditions and their outcome can be devastating, resulting in total loss of joint function, amputation, and systemic complications. Quality of life in terms of function, psychological outcome and endpoint achievements such as marriage and employment apparently do not differ significantly between amputee and nonamputee osteosarcoma survivors. Amputee patients nonetheless appear to have made satisfactory adjustments to their deficits with or without a functional external prosthesis. It also appeared that amputee patients had a similar psychological and quality of life outcome as limb salvage patients. There was no evidence of excessive anxiety or depression or deficits in self-esteem compared with the normal population or matched controls. A number of long-term survivors also achieved high ranking in the professional and commercial work place. These positive aspects should be recognized and emphasized to patients and their parents when discussing the outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20213405     DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0284-9_23

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Treat Res        ISSN: 0927-3042


  18 in total

1.  Does limb-salvage surgery offer patients better quality of life and functional capacity than amputation?

Authors:  Farbod Malek; Jeremy S Somerson; Shannon Mitchel; Ronald P Williams
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Health related quality of life studies in Indian patients after limb salvage surgery: Need of the hour.

Authors:  B K Chopra
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2013-07

3.  Frequent complications and severe bone loss associated with the repiphysis expandable distal femoral prosthesis.

Authors:  Cara A Cipriano; Irina S Gruzinova; Rachel M Frank; Steven Gitelis; Walter W Virkus
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Sociooccupational and physical outcomes more than 20 years after the diagnosis of osteosarcoma in children and adolescents: limb salvage versus amputation.

Authors:  Giulia Ottaviani; Rhonda S Robert; Winston W Huh; Shana Palla; Norman Jaffe
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Validation of the Brazilian version of the musculoskeletal tumor society rating scale for lower extremity bone sarcoma.

Authors:  Daniel Cesar Seguel Rebolledo; João Ricardo Nickenig Vissoci; Ricardo Pietrobon; Olavo Pires de Camargo; Andre Mathias Baptista
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The Current and Future Therapies for Human Osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Joseph D Lamplot; Sahitya Denduluri; Jiaqiang Qin; Ruidong Li; Xing Liu; Hongyu Zhang; Xiang Chen; Ning Wang; Abdullah Pratt; Wei Shui; Xiaoji Luo; Guoxin Nan; Zhong-Liang Deng; Jinyong Luo; Rex C Haydon; Tong-Chuan He; Hue H Luu
Journal:  Curr Cancer Ther Rev       Date:  2013-02

Review 7.  Drug delivery nanocarriers and recent advances ventured to improve therapeutic efficacy against osteosarcoma: an overview.

Authors:  Sujit Arun Desai; Arehalli Manjappa; Preeti Khulbe
Journal:  J Egypt Natl Canc Inst       Date:  2021-02-08

8.  The healing process of intracorporeally and in situ devitalized distal femur by microwave in a dog model and its mechanical properties in vitro.

Authors:  Zhenwei Ji; Yunlei Ma; Wei Li; Xiaoxiang Li; Guangyi Zhao; Zhe Yun; Jixian Qian; Qingyu Fan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Team Approach: Osteosarcoma of the Distal Part of the Femur in Adolescents.

Authors:  Russell N Stitzlein; John Wojcik; Ronnie A Sebro; Naomi J Balamuth; Kristy L Weber
Journal:  JBJS Rev       Date:  2017-12

10.  The reverse Warburg effect in osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Federica Sotgia; Ubaldo E Martinez-Outschoorn; Michael P Lisanti
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2014-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.