Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Surgical ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Surgical Oncology
Article . 2010 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Outcome of re‐excision for intralesionally treated parosteal osteosarcoma

Authors: Won Seok, Song; Dae-Geun, Jeon; Chang-Bae, Kong; Wan Hyeong, Cho; Soo-Yong, Lee;

Outcome of re‐excision for intralesionally treated parosteal osteosarcoma

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk of subsequent local recurrence (LR) and survival of parosteal osteosarcoma (POS) patients who underwent re‐excision after intralesional excision.MethodsWe analyzed clinical outcomes of 11 POS patients referred after intralesional excision. Average follow‐up was 86 months (range: 37–190 months). There were 9 Stage IB lesions and 2 Stage IIB lesions. Tumors were located in the femur (3) and in other locations (8). Seven patients showing recurrent tumor at referral received entire segmental excision while remaining four patients without LR underwent hemi‐cortical excision.ResultsThe 5‐year metastasis free survival rate of 11 patients was 81.8%. Patients without evident tumor mass did not show further recurrence after re‐excision. However, 5 (71.4%) of the 7 patients with recurrent tumor relapsed despite segmental re‐excision, and their median interval to subsequent LR was 18.8 months (range: 4–9 months). Two of five patients with re‐recurrence developed metastases which were unresponsive to chemotherapy.ConclusionsFollowing inadvertent intralesional procedure, re‐excision should be liberally applied before there is an evidence of recurrence. In patients presenting with gross LR, amputation should not be spared unless wide surgical margin can be achieved. J. Surg. Oncol. 2011; 103:264–268. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Keywords

Adult, Male, Reoperation, Osteosarcoma, Adolescent, Bone Neoplasms, Treatment Outcome, Risk Factors, Humans, Female, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Child, Follow-Up Studies, Neoplasm Staging, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    9
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
9
Average
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!