Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?

This study was conducted to assess the best available evidence for the use of isolated limb perfusion. Following the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine, we reviewed the best available evidence for isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limb. Adjuvant ILP w...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Annals of surgical oncology 2004-09, Vol.11 (9), p.837-845
Hauptverfasser: Noorda, Eva M, Vrouenraets, Bart C, Nieweg, Omgo E, Van Coevorden, Frits, Kroon, Bin B R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 845
container_issue 9
container_start_page 837
container_title Annals of surgical oncology
container_volume 11
creator Noorda, Eva M
Vrouenraets, Bart C
Nieweg, Omgo E
Van Coevorden, Frits
Kroon, Bin B R
description This study was conducted to assess the best available evidence for the use of isolated limb perfusion. Following the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine, we reviewed the best available evidence for isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limb. Adjuvant ILP with melphalan (M-ILP) to wide local excision cannot be recommended for patients with primary melanoma with a limited regional benefit and no increase in overall survival (level 1b evidence). Prophylactic M-ILP next to the excision of recurrent melanoma has resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in recurrence rate (33% to 50%), with a significantly longer recurrence-free interval (10 to 17 months), but no survival benefit (level 2b evidence). Therapeutic M-ILP, with or without tumor-necrosis factor alpha and interferon gamma (T(I)M-ILP), seems indicated in unresectable melanoma (level 3 to 4 evidence). In unresectable STS of the limbs, limb salvage can be obtained in 57% to 86% of patients with neoadjuvant T(I)M-ILP (level 3 evidence). A comparison of level 3 to 4 studies on ILP and other neoadjuvant treatment modalities for unresectable STS shows that ILP results in the highest limb salvage rate with the lowest complication rate. Based on level 3 to 4 evidence, ILP is indicated in unresectable locoregional (recurrent) melanoma and unresectable STS of the limbs. Level 1 and 2b evidence does show an effect of prophylactic ILP on micrometastatic disease in locoregional (recurrent) melanoma of the limb. ILP seems the most effective limb sparing, neoadjuvant treatment modality when compared with other neoadjuvant treatment options for unresectable STS of the limb (level 3 to 4 evidence), although randomized studies are lacking.
doi_str_mv 10.1245/ASO.2004.12.042
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66831785</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>66831785</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c322t-7983354551483d735d8d832abe231d24146711923c358e344e3d53f95258348d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkE1LAzEQhoMotlbP3iR48LZtkkmy2V6kFD8KhR7Uc9huZumW3W5NdhX_vSktCJ5mBp55Z3gIueVszIVUk9nbaiwYk3EaMynOyJArkInUhp_HnmmTZEKrAbkKYcsYT4GpSzKIEIcUzJBMF6Gt8w4dratmTffoyz5U7W5Kvzd5R6tAuw1S_Koc7gqkZetp1QXaB3y8JhdlXge8OdUR-Xh-ep-_JsvVy2I-WyYFCNElaWYAlFSKSwMuBeWMMyDyNQrgTkgudcp5JqAAZRCkRHAKykwJZUAaByPycMzd-_azx9DZpgoF1nW-w7YPVmsDPDUqgvf_wG3b-138zQoRDxstdIQmR6jwbQgeS7v3VZP7H8uZPTi10ak9OI2TjU7jxt0ptl836P74k0T4Bakzba4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>227358626</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Noorda, Eva M ; Vrouenraets, Bart C ; Nieweg, Omgo E ; Van Coevorden, Frits ; Kroon, Bin B R</creator><creatorcontrib>Noorda, Eva M ; Vrouenraets, Bart C ; Nieweg, Omgo E ; Van Coevorden, Frits ; Kroon, Bin B R</creatorcontrib><description>This study was conducted to assess the best available evidence for the use of isolated limb perfusion. Following the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine, we reviewed the best available evidence for isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limb. Adjuvant ILP with melphalan (M-ILP) to wide local excision cannot be recommended for patients with primary melanoma with a limited regional benefit and no increase in overall survival (level 1b evidence). Prophylactic M-ILP next to the excision of recurrent melanoma has resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in recurrence rate (33% to 50%), with a significantly longer recurrence-free interval (10 to 17 months), but no survival benefit (level 2b evidence). Therapeutic M-ILP, with or without tumor-necrosis factor alpha and interferon gamma (T(I)M-ILP), seems indicated in unresectable melanoma (level 3 to 4 evidence). In unresectable STS of the limbs, limb salvage can be obtained in 57% to 86% of patients with neoadjuvant T(I)M-ILP (level 3 evidence). A comparison of level 3 to 4 studies on ILP and other neoadjuvant treatment modalities for unresectable STS shows that ILP results in the highest limb salvage rate with the lowest complication rate. Based on level 3 to 4 evidence, ILP is indicated in unresectable locoregional (recurrent) melanoma and unresectable STS of the limbs. Level 1 and 2b evidence does show an effect of prophylactic ILP on micrometastatic disease in locoregional (recurrent) melanoma of the limb. ILP seems the most effective limb sparing, neoadjuvant treatment modality when compared with other neoadjuvant treatment options for unresectable STS of the limb (level 3 to 4 evidence), although randomized studies are lacking.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1068-9265</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-4681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1245/ASO.2004.12.042</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15313738</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Arm ; Chemotherapy, Cancer, Regional Perfusion ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Humans ; Leg ; Melanoma - drug therapy ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; Neoplasm Metastasis - prevention &amp; control ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - drug therapy ; Prognosis ; Sarcoma - drug therapy ; Skin Neoplasms - drug therapy ; Soft Tissue Neoplasms - drug therapy ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Annals of surgical oncology, 2004-09, Vol.11 (9), p.837-845</ispartof><rights>The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc. 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c322t-7983354551483d735d8d832abe231d24146711923c358e344e3d53f95258348d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c322t-7983354551483d735d8d832abe231d24146711923c358e344e3d53f95258348d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15313738$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Noorda, Eva M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vrouenraets, Bart C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nieweg, Omgo E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Coevorden, Frits</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kroon, Bin B R</creatorcontrib><title>Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?</title><title>Annals of surgical oncology</title><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><description>This study was conducted to assess the best available evidence for the use of isolated limb perfusion. Following the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine, we reviewed the best available evidence for isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limb. Adjuvant ILP with melphalan (M-ILP) to wide local excision cannot be recommended for patients with primary melanoma with a limited regional benefit and no increase in overall survival (level 1b evidence). Prophylactic M-ILP next to the excision of recurrent melanoma has resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in recurrence rate (33% to 50%), with a significantly longer recurrence-free interval (10 to 17 months), but no survival benefit (level 2b evidence). Therapeutic M-ILP, with or without tumor-necrosis factor alpha and interferon gamma (T(I)M-ILP), seems indicated in unresectable melanoma (level 3 to 4 evidence). In unresectable STS of the limbs, limb salvage can be obtained in 57% to 86% of patients with neoadjuvant T(I)M-ILP (level 3 evidence). A comparison of level 3 to 4 studies on ILP and other neoadjuvant treatment modalities for unresectable STS shows that ILP results in the highest limb salvage rate with the lowest complication rate. Based on level 3 to 4 evidence, ILP is indicated in unresectable locoregional (recurrent) melanoma and unresectable STS of the limbs. Level 1 and 2b evidence does show an effect of prophylactic ILP on micrometastatic disease in locoregional (recurrent) melanoma of the limb. ILP seems the most effective limb sparing, neoadjuvant treatment modality when compared with other neoadjuvant treatment options for unresectable STS of the limb (level 3 to 4 evidence), although randomized studies are lacking.</description><subject>Arm</subject><subject>Chemotherapy, Cancer, Regional Perfusion</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Leg</subject><subject>Melanoma - drug therapy</subject><subject>Neoadjuvant Therapy</subject><subject>Neoplasm Metastasis - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - drug therapy</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Sarcoma - drug therapy</subject><subject>Skin Neoplasms - drug therapy</subject><subject>Soft Tissue Neoplasms - drug therapy</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1068-9265</issn><issn>1534-4681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkE1LAzEQhoMotlbP3iR48LZtkkmy2V6kFD8KhR7Uc9huZumW3W5NdhX_vSktCJ5mBp55Z3gIueVszIVUk9nbaiwYk3EaMynOyJArkInUhp_HnmmTZEKrAbkKYcsYT4GpSzKIEIcUzJBMF6Gt8w4dratmTffoyz5U7W5Kvzd5R6tAuw1S_Koc7gqkZetp1QXaB3y8JhdlXge8OdUR-Xh-ep-_JsvVy2I-WyYFCNElaWYAlFSKSwMuBeWMMyDyNQrgTkgudcp5JqAAZRCkRHAKykwJZUAaByPycMzd-_azx9DZpgoF1nW-w7YPVmsDPDUqgvf_wG3b-138zQoRDxstdIQmR6jwbQgeS7v3VZP7H8uZPTi10ak9OI2TjU7jxt0ptl836P74k0T4Bakzba4</recordid><startdate>20040901</startdate><enddate>20040901</enddate><creator>Noorda, Eva M</creator><creator>Vrouenraets, Bart C</creator><creator>Nieweg, Omgo E</creator><creator>Van Coevorden, Frits</creator><creator>Kroon, Bin B R</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040901</creationdate><title>Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?</title><author>Noorda, Eva M ; Vrouenraets, Bart C ; Nieweg, Omgo E ; Van Coevorden, Frits ; Kroon, Bin B R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c322t-7983354551483d735d8d832abe231d24146711923c358e344e3d53f95258348d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Arm</topic><topic>Chemotherapy, Cancer, Regional Perfusion</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Leg</topic><topic>Melanoma - drug therapy</topic><topic>Neoadjuvant Therapy</topic><topic>Neoplasm Metastasis - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - drug therapy</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Sarcoma - drug therapy</topic><topic>Skin Neoplasms - drug therapy</topic><topic>Soft Tissue Neoplasms - drug therapy</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Noorda, Eva M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vrouenraets, Bart C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nieweg, Omgo E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Coevorden, Frits</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kroon, Bin B R</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Noorda, Eva M</au><au>Vrouenraets, Bart C</au><au>Nieweg, Omgo E</au><au>Van Coevorden, Frits</au><au>Kroon, Bin B R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?</atitle><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><date>2004-09-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>837</spage><epage>845</epage><pages>837-845</pages><issn>1068-9265</issn><eissn>1534-4681</eissn><abstract>This study was conducted to assess the best available evidence for the use of isolated limb perfusion. Following the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine, we reviewed the best available evidence for isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for melanoma and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) of the limb. Adjuvant ILP with melphalan (M-ILP) to wide local excision cannot be recommended for patients with primary melanoma with a limited regional benefit and no increase in overall survival (level 1b evidence). Prophylactic M-ILP next to the excision of recurrent melanoma has resulted in a nonsignificant decrease in recurrence rate (33% to 50%), with a significantly longer recurrence-free interval (10 to 17 months), but no survival benefit (level 2b evidence). Therapeutic M-ILP, with or without tumor-necrosis factor alpha and interferon gamma (T(I)M-ILP), seems indicated in unresectable melanoma (level 3 to 4 evidence). In unresectable STS of the limbs, limb salvage can be obtained in 57% to 86% of patients with neoadjuvant T(I)M-ILP (level 3 evidence). A comparison of level 3 to 4 studies on ILP and other neoadjuvant treatment modalities for unresectable STS shows that ILP results in the highest limb salvage rate with the lowest complication rate. Based on level 3 to 4 evidence, ILP is indicated in unresectable locoregional (recurrent) melanoma and unresectable STS of the limbs. Level 1 and 2b evidence does show an effect of prophylactic ILP on micrometastatic disease in locoregional (recurrent) melanoma of the limb. ILP seems the most effective limb sparing, neoadjuvant treatment modality when compared with other neoadjuvant treatment options for unresectable STS of the limb (level 3 to 4 evidence), although randomized studies are lacking.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><pmid>15313738</pmid><doi>10.1245/ASO.2004.12.042</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1068-9265
ispartof Annals of surgical oncology, 2004-09, Vol.11 (9), p.837-845
issn 1068-9265
1534-4681
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66831785
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Arm
Chemotherapy, Cancer, Regional Perfusion
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Leg
Melanoma - drug therapy
Neoadjuvant Therapy
Neoplasm Metastasis - prevention & control
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local - drug therapy
Prognosis
Sarcoma - drug therapy
Skin Neoplasms - drug therapy
Soft Tissue Neoplasms - drug therapy
Treatment Outcome
title Isolated limb perfusion: what is the evidence for its use?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T22%3A07%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Isolated%20limb%20perfusion:%20what%20is%20the%20evidence%20for%20its%20use?&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20surgical%20oncology&rft.au=Noorda,%20Eva%20M&rft.date=2004-09-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=837&rft.epage=845&rft.pages=837-845&rft.issn=1068-9265&rft.eissn=1534-4681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1245/ASO.2004.12.042&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66831785%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=227358626&rft_id=info:pmid/15313738&rfr_iscdi=true