Rotationplasty outcomes assessed by gait analysis following resection of lower extremity bone neoplasms

Aims

The standard of surgical treatment for lower limb neoplasms had been characterized by highly interventional techniques, leading to severe kinetic impairment of the patients and incidences of phantom pain. Rotationplasty had arisen as a potent limb salvage treatment option for young cancer patients with lower limb bone tumours, but its impact on the gait through comparative studies still remains unclear several years after the introduction of the procedure. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of rotationplasty on gait parameters measured by gait analysis compared to healthy individuals.

Methods

The MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched without time restriction until 10 January 2022 for eligible studies. Gait parameters measured by gait analysis were the outcomes of interest.

Results

Three studies were eligible for analyses. Compared to healthy individuals, rotationplasty significantly decreased gait velocity (-1.45 cm/sec; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.98 to -0.93; p < 0.001), stride length (-1.20 cm; 95% CI -2.31 to -0.09; p < 0.001), cadence (-0.83 stride/min; 95% (CI -1.29 to -0.36; p < 0.001), and non-significantly increased cycle time (0.54 sec; 95% CI -0.42 to 1.51; p = 0.184).

Conclusion

Rotationplasty is a valid option for the management of lower limb bone tumours in young cancer patients. Larger studies, with high patient accrual, refined surgical techniques, and well planned rehabilitation strategies, are required to further improve the reported outcomes of this procedure.

Meningioma grading based on positron emission tomography: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Meningiomas are the most common central nervous system tumor in adults. Knowledge of the tumor grade can guide optimal treatment timing and shape personalized follow-up strategies. Positron emission tomography (PET) has been utilized for the metabolic assessment of various intracranial space-occupying lesions. Herewith, we set out to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of PET for the noninvasive assessment of meningioma's grade.

Materials and methods

The Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were systematically searched in March 2022 for studies that evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of PET compared to the gold standard of histological diagnosis in the grading of meningiomas. Summary statistics will be calculated and scatter plots, summary curve from the HSROC model and posterior predictions by empirical Bayes estimates will be presented.

Results

Five studies consisting of 242 patients with a total of 196 low-grade (Grade 1) and 46 high grade (Grade 2/3) meningiomas were included in our analysis. Three of the included studies used ¹⁸F-FDG, one study used ¹⁸F-FLT and one used(Whiting et al., 2011) 18 F-FET as PET tracers. The pooled sensitivity was 76% (95% CI: 52%-91%) and the pooled specificity was 89% (95% CI: 83%-93%). The diagnostic odds ratio was 27.17 (95% CI: 9.22-80.06), the positive likelihood ratio was 7.18 (95% CI: 4.54-11.34) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.11-0.61).

Conclusion

PET is a promising and viable option as a noninvasive imaging tool to differentiate the meningioma grades. However, currently it cannot overtake the gold standard of histological grade confirmation. More studies are required for further validation and refinement of this imaging technique and assessment of other radiotracers as well.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for management of gastrointestinal and biliary tract malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Background

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) promised to transform the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Forty years since the introduction of the technique, published data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain scarce. We assessed the cumulative comprehensive available evidence on the use of HIPEC in gastrointestinal (GI) and biliary tract malignancies and established the current benchmark for GI HIPEC research in both the prevention and treatment of peritoneal metastases.

Methods

RCTs were identified through a systematic search of Medline, Cochrane and Embase databases. Overall survival and progression-free survival were the outcomes of interest.

Results

The search resulted in 13 RCTs for gastric cancer (10 on prophylactic and 3 on therapeutic HIPEC), 4 for colorectal cancer (2 on prophylactic and 2 on therapeutic HIPEC), and 1 for pancreatic cancer. No RCTs were identified that included other types of GI or biliary tract cancers. Current randomized evidence does not support any overall survival benefit from the use of HIPEC in the adjuvant setting for gastric cancer or for colorectal cancer in any setting. Despite the survival benefit noticed in the treatment of PC from gastric cancer (risk ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.93; P<0.001), the results were derived from only 190 patients.

Conclusions

The current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of HIPEC in the treatment/prevention of PC in GI and biliary tract malignancies. HIPEC should continue to be considered experimental until level 1 evidence from properly designed international multicenter studies becomes available.

Prosthetic reconstruction following resection of lower extremity bone neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

•

Prosthetics are the mainstay in surgery after resection of extremity bone tumors.

•

For these patients gait parameters deteriorated compared to healthy individuals.

•

Further refinement of surgical techniques is required.

•

New rehabilitation strategies and follow-up programming are needed.

Prosthetic reconstructive procedures have become the mainstay in contemporary surgical treatment following resection of extremity bone neoplasms. Given that these patients are of young age most of the time, achievement of robust functional outcomes is of paramount importance. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of this procedure on the gait parameters of cancer patients compared to healthy individuals. The Medline, Scopus and Cochrane databases were systematically searched until January 2022 for eligible studies. Gait parameters measured by gait analysis after prosthetic reconstruction were the outcomes of interest. Eight cohort studies were included in our analysis. From these, seven studied prosthetic reconstruction of the knee (distal femur or proximal tibia) and only one exclusively studied prostetic reconstructions of the proximal femur. Compared to healthy individuals a significant decrease was evident in gait velocity (-0.16 m/sec, 95 %CI: −0.23 to −0.09, p-value < 0.001), in stride length (-6.07 %height, 95 %CI: −9,36 to −2.78, p-value < 0.001), in cadence (-3.96 stride/min, 95 %CI: −5.41 to −2.51, p-value < 0.001) and significant increase in cycle time (0.10 s, 95 %CI: 0.03 to 0.17, p-value = 0.005). Prosthetic reconstruction following lower limb tumor resection significantly affects the gait of patients. This knowledge can be utilized for further refinement of surgical techniques, rehabilitation strategies and follow-up programming.

Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for the management of primary advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

Introduction

Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy. Although treatment with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results, its role remains elusive. The aim of this study was to assess the comprehensive randomized evidence for the use versus non-use of HIPEC in primary and recurrent ovarian cancer.

Materials and methods

The Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, as well as the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conference abstracts of the last 5 years, were scrutinized in January 2022 for randomized, controlled trials that studied the use of HIPEC in ovarian cancer. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and progression-free survival, as well as post-operative morbidity were the outcomes of interest. This study was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Results

Six randomized, controlled trials that randomized 737 patients were included in our analysis; of these, four studies (519 patients) were in primary and two (218 patients) in recurrent settings. In primary ovarian cancer, the combination of HIPEC with interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved the 5-year OS [393 patients, risk ratio (RR) = 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.90; P value = 0.001] and DFS (hazard ratio = 0.60; 95% CI 0.41-0.87; P value = 0.008) compared with standard treatment alone. In the absence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the use of HIPEC + CRS was not associated with any survival advantage (126 patients, 4-year OS, RR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.57-1.53; P value = 0.781), but the sample size was smaller in this subset. Use of HIPEC in recurrent ovarian cancer did not provide any survival advantage (5-year OS: 218 patients, RR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.45-1.62; P value = 0.626). The risk for grade ≥3 adverse events was similar between HIPEC and no HIPEC (RR = 1.08; 95% CI 0.98-1.18; P value = 0.109).

Conclusions

In primary ovarian cancer the combination of HIPEC with interval CRS and neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a safe option that significantly improved 5-year OS and DFS. Its use in other settings should continue to be considered investigational.

•

Addition of HIPEC to a complete cytoreductive surgery could be a valid treatment option for advanced ovarian cancer.

•

HIPEC following neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increases 5-year overall survival in primary advanced ovarian cancer.

•

HIPEC following neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increases disease-free survival in primary advanced ovarian cancer.

•

HIPEC is a safe treatment option in ovarian cancer.