Literature DB >> 3912743

The UCLA experience in limb salvage surgery for malignant tumors.

J J Eckardt, F R Eilber, F J Dorey, J M Mirra.   

Abstract

Between December 1980 and January 1985, 95 patients with 98 malignant bone tumors were treated at UCLA by a multidisciplinary approach. Seventy-eight patients with 81 lesions underwent primary limb salvage procedures utilizing 66 custom endoprostheses and, in 15 instances, soft tissue reconstruction alone. Sixty-three of 78 (80.7%) underwent successful limb salvage without complication. The 22 local complications in 15 patients (19.2%) were all successfully managed either by surgical or nonoperative techniques salvaging all 15 extremities at risk. Seventeen patients underwent primary amputation for local control of their tumor. The local recurrence rate of 6.4% in the limb salvage group is comparable to the 5.8% found in the amputation group. The selection of patients for limb salvage did not adversely prejudice these patients in terms of rates of progression or ultimate survivorship. The cosmetic and functional results of limb sparing surgery is felt to be at least comparable with that obtained by primary amputation and the use of external prostheses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3912743     DOI: 10.3928/0147-7447-19850501-15

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  10 in total

1.  Early distal femoral endoprosthetic survival: cemented stems versus the Compress implant.

Authors:  A A Bhangu; M J Kramer; R J Grimer; R J O'Donnell
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-09-16       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Orthopedics: endoprosthetic limb salvage operation for malignant bone tumors.

Authors:  J J Eckardt
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1987-04

3.  The current state of limb salvage surgery.

Authors:  Henry J Mankin
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Lower limb salvage surgery: modular endoprosthesis in bone tumour treatment.

Authors:  D Orlic; M Smerdelj; R Kolundzic; M Bergovec
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-08-08       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Custom mega-prosthetic replacement for proximal humeral tumours.

Authors:  N Mayilvahanan; M Paraskumar; A Sivaseelam; S Natarajan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-03-25       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 6.  A review of clinical and molecular prognostic factors in osteosarcoma.

Authors:  Jonathan C M Clark; Crispin R Dass; Peter F M Choong
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-10-27       Impact factor: 4.553

7.  Survival of modern knee tumor megaprostheses: failures, functional results, and a comparative statistical analysis.

Authors:  Elisa Pala; Giulia Trovarelli; Teresa Calabrò; Andrea Angelini; Caterina N Abati; Pietro Ruggieri
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The use of megaprostheses for reconstruction of large skeletal defects in the extremities: a critical review.

Authors:  Anthippi Gkavardina; Panagiotis Tsagozis
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2014-10-17

9.  Cemented distal femoral endoprostheses for musculoskeletal tumor: improved survival of modular versus custom implants.

Authors:  Adam J Schwartz; J Michael Kabo; Fritz C Eilber; Frederick R Eilber; Jeffrey J Eckardt
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Results of 20 consecutive patients treated with the Repiphysis expandable prosthesis for primary malignant bone.

Authors:  Joseph Benevenia; Francis Patterson; Kathleen Beebe; Kimberly Tucker; Jeffrey Moore; Joseph Ippolito; Steven Rivero
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2015-12-22
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.