D136. Spare the Limb and Spoil the Outcome: Why do Some Osteosarcoma Patients Pursue Revision Amputation and Does the Amputation Improve The Outcome?

dc.contributor.authorPolovneff, Alexandra
dc.contributor.authorSeitz, Vienne
dc.contributor.authorPanoch, Janet
dc.contributor.authorHoben, Gwendolyn
dc.contributor.departmentObstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-20T15:40:31Z
dc.date.available2023-12-20T15:40:31Z
dc.date.issued2023-04-26
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: There is tremendous emphasis on limb sparing surgery (LSS) in osteosarcoma. However, a substantial number of LSS patients choose to transition to an amputation-type revision, including rotation-plasty and turn-up plasty. The purpose of this study was to determine motivating factors for revision and whether those interventions better address the motivating factors. METHODS: We identified the most popular public Osteosarcoma Facebook group and selected posts from a 12 month period regarding surgical interventions. We used iterative inductive and deductive thematic analysis to collect qualitative data RESULTS: 378 comments from the Osteosarcoma and Ewing’s Sarcoma Support Group were analyzed. Three themes emerged: (1) There is a lack of options presented to patients seeking treatment of osteosarcoma. (2) Many patients were unsatisfied and regretted their decision to undergo LSS because of numerous revisions, physical limitations, and chronic pain. (3) Many patients treated primarily or secondarily (following LSS) with rotation-plasty were satisfied with their lifestyle outcomes and mentioned improved mobility, range of motion, and limited chronic pain. CONCLUSION: LSS can result in significant morbidity and despite sparing the limb, some patients are choosing to pursue amputation. Further work will need to examine amputation interventions to ensure that they can successfully address the problems identified with LSS, including mobility and pain. Prior concerns with amputation, including phantom limb pain, can now be addressed with targeted muscle reinnervation and regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces. Moreover, these options may deserve more discussion in the setting of the primary surgery.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.identifier.citationPolovneff A, Seitz V, Panoch J, Hoben G. D136. Spare the Limb and Spoil the Outcome: Why do Some Osteosarcoma Patients Pursue Revision Amputation and Does the Amputation Improve The Outcome?. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2023;11(4 Suppl):126-127. Published 2023 Apr 26. doi:10.1097/01.GOX.0000935128.68141.69
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/37455
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer
dc.relation.isversionof10.1097/01.GOX.0000935128.68141.69
dc.relation.journalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery: Global Open
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.sourcePMC
dc.subjectLimb sparing surgery (LSS)
dc.subjectOsteosarcoma
dc.subjectRotation-plasty
dc.subjectTurn-up plasty
dc.titleD136. Spare the Limb and Spoil the Outcome: Why do Some Osteosarcoma Patients Pursue Revision Amputation and Does the Amputation Improve The Outcome?
dc.typeAbstract
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
gox-11-00126b.pdf
Size:
112.26 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: