Limb function and quality of life after various reconstruction methods according to tumor location following resection of osteosarcoma in distal femur.

BACKGROUND: We tried to compare the functional and psychosocial outcomes after various reconstruction methods according to tumor location following resection of osteosarcoma in distal femur. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 51 patients who underwent limb-salvage surgery of osteosarcoma in distal femur in our institution, 30 males and 21 females with an average age of 21 years (range 13-51 years). We classified osteosarcoma in distal femur into 3 types, and organized affected limb reconstruction methods after wide resection. MSTS and QOL scores were used to analyze the functional and psychological outcomes. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 43 months (12-225 months), there is no difference on functional results and QOL scores among three reconstruction groups (p > 0.05) and among three types groups (p > 0.05). No difference could be noticed on tumor-free survival and total survival among three reconstruction groups (p > 0.05) and three type groups (p > 0.05). In ≤2-year, better functional scores could be found in prosthesis group, rather than the other two inactivated-bone groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Biological reconstruction with alcohol-inactivated autograft replantation could avoid prosthesis related complications and achieved comparable results with prosthesis following resection of osteosarcoma in distal femur. Different reconstruction options could be chosen according to tumor location, such as the distance to Insall line.

Clinical benefits of femoroplasty: a nonsurgical alternative for the management of femoral metastases.

BACKGROUND: Bone metastases occur frequently in advanced cancer. The spine, pelvis, ribs, skull and femur are the most affected sites. It is reported that up to 83% of the patients develop pain at some point of the disease. The patient can also develop fractures and disability, particularly in the femur.. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous femoroplasty in patients with metastatic osseous disease located in the proximal femur (trochanter, neck, and femoral head). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective clinical review, comparing pain status "before vs after" intervention. SETTING: National Cancer Institute in Mexico. METHODS: We included patients over 18 years old, with mild to severe pain due to metastasis in the proximal femur (trochanter, neck, or head), or with a high risk of fracture according to Mirels scale (> 8 points) or severe osteoporosis according to the World Health Organization (a Karnofsky score more than 50%). Exclusion criteria were femoral fracture. We recorded the following variables age, sex, type of neoplasm, concomitant therapy, We used the Karnofsky functionality scale, the VAS pain intensity assessment, the "Mayo Clinic" scale to measure improved functionality, and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 15 Palliative (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL) (Spanish version) questionnaires. Follow-up was performed at 7 days, one month after femoroplasty, and during the individual outpatient that lasted one year on average. RESULTS: Eighty subjects were enrolled. Seventy-three percent were women. The most frequent tumors were breast (46.3%), followed by multiple myeloma (18.7%). All patients had a decrease in the intensity of pain, analgesic consumption, and improved quality of life, at 7 and 30 days after the intervention. There were no complications with serious consequences. Two participants experienced polymethylmetacrylate (PMMA) leakage, without clinical or functional impact. In 4 patients, the needle was occluded during the filling process and we had to place another biopsy needle through the same entry site to finish the injection process. LIMITATIONS: The sample was a single group of patients evaluated before and after the femoroplasty. We did not include a control group. CONCLUSION: The results of the current report suggest that femoroplasty, a percutaneous cement placement analogous to a vertebroplasty, might be a therapeutic option for patients with metastatic bone disease of the proximal femur, providing the patient an analgesic reduction and a better quality of life.

[Amputation or limb salvage? Assessing quality of life after tumor operations of the lower extremity]. / Amputation oder Extremitätenerhalt? Beurteilung der Lebensqualität nach Tumoroperationen an der unteren Extremität.

The purpose of this study was to compare quality of life and subjective well-being between patients who underwent either amputation or limb-salvage procedures for lower extremity sarcomas in order to determine if this aspect can be considered in the decision on the type of surgery. Sixty-six patients were evaluated at least 1 year after surgery and systemic therapy for lower extremity sarcomas. Self-report questionnaires such as the Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), the Life Satisfaction Questionnaire (FLZ), and the Enneking Score (MSTS) were used. There were no differences in quality of life and subjective well-being between the two groups. Scores of the symptom scale (14.1 vs 13.2), the global quality of life (70.9 vs 71.0) as well as scores of the function scale (51.7 vs 50.3) were similar. Small differences in scores were found in social functioning but not in scores of physical, cognitive, and emotional functioning. Global subjective well-being in both groups was also similar (219.5 vs 223.7). High satisfaction was found in marital life and partnership as well as in self-assessment. The least satisfaction was found in finances. Results in functional outcome after limb-salvage procedures (77% vs 65%) were better. Although more complications were reported after limb-salvage procedures, they did not seem to have any impact on quality of life ( p=0.235, r(p)=0.112) and subjective well-being ( p=0.856, r(p)=0.140) of the patients whereas a correlation to function could be shown ( p<0.001, r(p)=0.595; p=0.015, r(p)=0.304). Additionally, a correlation between subjective well-being and the location of either amputation or reconstruction ( p=0.039, r(p)=- 0.309) could be shown. These findings demonstrate that the type of surgery has no influence on quality of life and subjective well-being after lower extremity sarcomas. Thus the decision for either limb-salvage procedures or amputation cannot be based on quality of life and subjective well-being but must be determined by oncological criteria.

[Psychological adjustment to invasive surgical and medicamentous tumor treatment of osteosarcoma patients with rotation-plasty]. / Die psychische Verarbeitung invasiver operativer und medikamentöser Tumorbehandlung bei Osteosarkompatienten mit Umkehrplastik.

Ten patients with osteosarcomas and rotation plasties made themselves available for a psychological survey. The time elapsed after their operations was between two and ten years, giving an average of six years. All patients were free of tumours at the time of the follow-up examination. Both in personal interviews and in psychological tests, it was possible to observe a very positive development of these patients' attitudes. Contributory factors in this context were discussions with the doctors administering treatment, the cheerful atmosphere of the hospital and the nursing staff, the physicotherapists and ergotherapists, and the excellent social support which all those interviewed also received from their relatives. Continuous positive motivation, a favourable social dialogue and patients' ability to control their own lives would appear to be the key factors in helping patients to come to terms with their illness.

[3 osteosarcoma therapy dropouts. Clinical cases]. / Therapieabbruch bei 3 Osteosarkom-Patienten. Eine Kasuistik.

We report on 3 cases of male late-adolescent/young-adult osteogenic sarcoma patients who refused complete chemical therapy according to the treatment plan "COSS 80". They all originated from disturbed family situations. Characteristic was their early independence and autonomy, dominance tendency, low level of self control, and high level of sociability. Primary motivation for refusal was the experienced intolerability of the chemotherapeutical side-effects and extreme fear of medical procedures (e.g. injections).