Are Limb-sparing Surgical Resections Comparable to Amputation for Patients With Pelvic Chondrosarcoma? A Case-control, Propensity Score-matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database
Chondrosarcoma is the second most frequent primary sarcoma of bone and frequently occurs in the pelvis. Surgical resection is the primary treatment with the two main operative modalities being limb-sparing resection and amputation. Contemporary management has trended toward limb-sparing procedures;...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical orthopaedics and related research 2019-03, Vol.477 (3), p.596-605 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Chondrosarcoma is the second most frequent primary sarcoma of bone and frequently occurs in the pelvis. Surgical resection is the primary treatment with the two main operative modalities being limb-sparing resection and amputation. Contemporary management has trended toward limb-sparing procedures; however, whether this approach has an adverse effect on long-term survival is unclear.
(1) What are the 5- and 10-year survival rates after limb-sparing surgery and amputation? (2) What factors are associated with survival after contemporary surgical management of pelvic chondrosarcoma?
The 2004-2014 National Cancer Database, a nationwide registry that includes approximately 70% of all new cancers in the United States with requirement for 90% followup, was reviewed for patients diagnosed with pelvic chondrosarcoma who had undergone limb-sparing surgery or amputation. To compare survival, patient demographics, tumor attributes, and treatment characteristics were used to generate one-to-one propensity score-matched cohorts. Other factors associated with survival were determined through multivariable Cox regression. Three hundred eighty-five patients (75%) underwent limb-sparing surgery and 131 (25%) underwent amputation. Propensity score matching resulted in two balanced cohorts of 131 patients.
With the numbers available, we could not demonstrate a difference in overall survival between limb-sparing procedures and amputation. The 5-year survivorship was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI], 62%-79%) for limb-sparing surgery versus 70% (95% CI, 62%-79%) for amputation. The 10-year survivorship was 60% (95% CI, 48%-75%) for limb-sparing surgery versus 59% (95% CI, 48%-72%) for amputation. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not demonstrate a difference in survival (p = 0.9). Older age (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.029, p < 0.001), higher Charlson/Deyo comorbidity score (HR = 3.039, p = 0.004), higher grade (HR = 2.547, p = 0.005 for Grade 2; HR = 7.269, p < 0.001 for Grade 3; HR = 10.36, p < 0.001 for Grade 4), and positive surgical margins (HR = 1.61, p = 0.039) were associated with decreased survival.
Our findings support the trend toward increased use of limb-sparing surgery for patients with pelvic chondrosarcoma. Orthopaedic oncologists may use our results when counseling their patients regarding treatment options. However, the choice of limb-sparing surgery versus amputation for these challenging patients should still be a highly individualized decision with careful dis |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0009-921X 1528-1132 0009-921X |
DOI: | 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000622 |