JB & JS open access · 2025
Comparison of Biological Reconstruction After Resection of Proximal Humerus Bone Sarcomas in Pediatric Patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Zhuoyu, Liu Weifeng, Jin Tao, Sun Yang, Li Yuan, Niu Xiaohui, Jiang Chunyan, Zhang Qing
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes and complications of vascularized fibular epiphyseal transfer (VFET) and clavicle pro humero (CPH) for proximal humeral reconstruction after primary sarcoma resection in skeletally immature patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective case-control study included 29 skeletally immature patients (18 male patients, 11 female patients) with primary bone sarcomas who were treated between January 2009 and June 2023 at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital. The average age was 9.4 ± 2.8 years (range, 5-14), and the pathological type included osteosarcoma (25) and Ewing sarcoma (4). We compared the graft survival, function, and complication rate between the VFET group and the CPH group.
RESULTS: The 2-year and 5-year overall survival rates for the VFET group and CPH group were 94%, 75%, 86%, and 55%, respectively. The 2-year and 5-year revision-free survival for the VFET group and CPH group were 77%, 61%, 75%, and 37%, respectively. At the final follow-up, the mean MSTS-93 score in the VFET group was 82% (67%-97%), while the mean MSTS-93 score in the CPH group was 79% (73%-96%, p > 0.05). The incidence of mechanical complications was significantly higher in the CPH group (88%, 7/8) than that in the VFET group (52%, 11/21) (p = 0.036). The mean difference in upper limb length in the VFET group was 5.0 ± 2.9 cm and 10.2 ± 4.2 cm in the CPH group (p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that vascularized fibular epiphyseal transfer may be considered as a promising biological reconstruction option for pediatric patients with proximal humeral osteosarcoma who have a longer life expectancy. For institutions lacking the necessary microsurgical techniques, clavicle pro humero reconstruction remains a relatively simple and feasible alternative reconstruction option.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Case-control study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective case-control study included 29 skeletally immature patients (18 male patients, 11 female patients) with primary bone sarcomas who were treated between January 2009 and June 2023 at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital. The average age was 9.4 ± 2.8 years (range, 5-14), and the pathological type included osteosarcoma (25) and Ewing sarcoma (4). We compared the graft survival, function, and complication rate between the VFET group and the CPH group.
RESULTS: The 2-year and 5-year overall survival rates for the VFET group and CPH group were 94%, 75%, 86%, and 55%, respectively. The 2-year and 5-year revision-free survival for the VFET group and CPH group were 77%, 61%, 75%, and 37%, respectively. At the final follow-up, the mean MSTS-93 score in the VFET group was 82% (67%-97%), while the mean MSTS-93 score in the CPH group was 79% (73%-96%, p > 0.05). The incidence of mechanical complications was significantly higher in the CPH group (88%, 7/8) than that in the VFET group (52%, 11/21) (p = 0.036). The mean difference in upper limb length in the VFET group was 5.0 ± 2.9 cm and 10.2 ± 4.2 cm in the CPH group (p = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that vascularized fibular epiphyseal transfer may be considered as a promising biological reconstruction option for pediatric patients with proximal humeral osteosarcoma who have a longer life expectancy. For institutions lacking the necessary microsurgical techniques, clavicle pro humero reconstruction remains a relatively simple and feasible alternative reconstruction option.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III Case-control study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.