Author M S Satish[1], Srinivasan Vijay[1], Anand Raja[2], Surendran Veeraiah[3]
[1]Department of Physiotherapist, Cancer Institute (WIA), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India,
[2]Department of Surgical Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India,
[3]Department of Psycho-Oncology, Cancer Institute (WIA), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.

Address of Correspondence
Dr. M S Satish,
Department of Physiotherapist, Cancer Institute(WIA), Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: ms.satish@cancerinstitutewia.org

Abstract
Context: Despite the advances in surgical treatments and chemotherapy, obtaining an optimal outcome in the treatment of musculoskeletal tumors or sarcomas is still quite challenging. This can be managed by improving various factors such as survival and recurrence rate, longevity of the prosthesis, functional outcome, and quality of life (QOL) of patients. However, not much attention has been given to this issue in India.
Aims: The aim of the study was to examine the QOL and functional outcome of musculoskeletal cancer patients who were treated with revision limb salvage surgery (LSS) and those who underwent above-knee (AK) amputation followed by rehabilitation with Akprosthesis.
Settings and Design: A cross-sectional study was carried out between May 2015 and April 2016 at Physiotherapy Out patient Department of Cancer Institute, Chennai.
Materials and Methods: Thirty-two patients aged between 15and 60 years, treated with revision LSS (n=15) and those rehabilitated with prosthesis after AK amputation (n=17)were assessed for QOL and functional outcome. Cancer Institute QOL questionnaire was used to assess QOL and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was used to find the functional outcome of these patients.
Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics, student’s t-test, and Chi-square test were used to analyze the data using SPSS version 13.
Results: The revision LSS patients were found to have a better functional outcome as well as QOL than the amputees. Yet another aspect of QOL, namely, fear of recurrence was much lesser among AK amputees than revision LSS patients.
Conclusions: The findings of this study imply that revision LSS has higher advantages in terms of functional outcome and QOL of patients compared to amputation, though patients treated with revision LSS were found to have increased fear of recurrence and pain than the amputees.
Keywords: Revision limb salvage surgery, quality of life, functional outcome, amputation, musculoskeletal tumor.

References
1. Chauhan A, Joshi GR, Chopra BK, Ganguly M, Reddy GR. Limb salvage surgery in bone tumors: A retrospective study of 50 cases in a single center. Indian J Surg Oncol 2013;4:248-54.
2. Allison DC, Carney SC, Ahlmann ER, Hendifar A, Chawla S, Fedenko A, et al. A meta-analysis of osteosarcoma outcomes in the modern medical era. Sarcoma 2012;2012:704872.
3. Reddy KI, Wafa H, Gaston CL, Grimer RJ, Abudu AT, Jeys LM, et al. Does amputation offer any survival benefit over limb salvage in osteosarcoma patients with poor chemonecrosis and close margins? Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:115-20.
4. Yoshida Y, Osaka S, Kojima T, Taniguchi M, Osaka E, Tokuhashi Y, et al. Revision of tumor prosthesis of the knee joint. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol2012;22:387-94.
5. Davidson JH, Jones LE, Cornet J, Cittarelli T. Management of the multiple limb amputee. DisabilRehabil2002;24:688-99.
6. Zidarov D, Swaine B, Gauthier-Gagnon C. Quality of life of persons with lower-limb amputation during rehabilitation and at 3-month follow-up. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2009;90:634-45.
7. Robert RS, Ottaviani G, Huh WW, Palla S, Jaffe N. Psychosocial and functional outcomes in long-term survivors of osteosarcoma: A comparison of limb-salvage surgery and amputation. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2010;54:990-9.
8. Aksnes LH, Bauer HC, Jebsen NL, Follerås G, Allert C, Haugen GS, et al. Limb-sparing surgery preserves more function than amputation: A Scandinavian sarcoma group study of 118 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:786-94.
9. Zahlten-Hinguranage A, Bernd L, Ewerbeck V, Sabo D. Equal quality of life after limb-sparing or ablative surgery for lower extremity sarcomas. Br J Cancer 2004;91:1012-4.
10. Weddington WW Jr.,Segraves KB, Simon MA. Psychological outcome of extremity sarcoma survivors undergoing amputation or limb salvage. J Clin Oncol 1985;3:1393-9.
11. Meyers PA, Gorlick R. Osteosarcoma. Pediatr Clin North Am 1997;44:973-89.
12. Enneking WF, Dunham W, Gebhardt MC, Malawar M, Pritchard DJ. A system for the functional evaluation of reconstructive procedures after surgical treatment of tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Clin OrthopRelat Res 1993;286:241-6.
13. Vidhubala E, Kannan RR, Mani SC, Karthikesh K, Muthuvel R, Surendran V, et al. Validation of quality of life questionnaire for patients with cancer Indian scenario. Indian J Cancer 2005;42:138-44.
14. Eiser C, Darlington AS, Stride CB, Grimer R. Quality of life implications as a consequence of surgery: Limb salvage, primary and secondary amputation. Sarcoma 2001;5:189-95.
15. Ruggieri P, Mavrogenis AF, Mercuri M. Quality of life following limb-salvage surgery for bone sarcomas. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2011;11:59-73.
16. Mason GE, Aung L, Gall S, Meyers PA, Butler R, Krüg S, et al. Quality of life following amputation or limb preservation in patients with lower extremity bone sarcoma. Front Oncol 2013;3:210.
17. Hopyan S, Tan JW, Graham HK, Torode IP. Function and upright time following limb salvage, amputation, and rotationplasty for pediatric sarcoma of bone. J PediatrOrthop2006;26:405-8.
18. Davis AM, Devlin M, Griffin AM, Wunder JS, Bell RS. Functional outcome in amputation versus limb sparing of patients with lower extremity sarcoma: A matched case-control study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1999;80:615-8.
19. Malek F, Somerson JS, Mitchel S, Williams RP. Does limb-salvage surgery offer patients better quality of life and functional capacity than amputation? Clin OrthopRelat Res 2012;470:2000-6.
20. Renard AJ, Veth RP, Schreuder HW, van Loon CJ, Koops HS, van Horn JR, et al. Function and complications after ablative and limb-salvage therapy in lower extremity sarcoma of bone. J Surg Oncol 2000;73:198-205.
21. Ginsberg JP, Rai SN, Carlson CA, Meadows AT, Hinds PS, Spearing EM, et al. A comparative analysis of functional outcomes in adolescents and young adults with lower-extremity bone sarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2007;49:964-9.
22. Bekkering WP, Vliet Vlieland TP, Koopman HM, Schaap GR, Bart Schreuder HW, Beishuizen A, et al. Functional ability and physical activity in children and young adults after limb-salvage or ablative surgery for lower extremity bone tumors. J Surg Oncol 2011;103:276-82.
23. Rougraff BT, Simon MA, Kneisl JS, Greenberg DB, Mankin HJ. Limb salvage compared with amputation for osteosarcoma of the distal end of the femur. A long-term oncological, functional, and quality-of-life study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994;76:649-56.

Dr. M S Satish	Dr. Srinivasan Vijay	Dr. Anand Raja	Dr. Surendran Veeraiah

[Full Text HTML] [Full Text PDF] [XML]

Authors: Wilasinee Sirichativapee [1], Weerachai Kosuwon [1], Winai Sirichativapee [1].

[1] Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Address of Correspondence
Dr. Winai Sirichativapee,
Department of Orthopaedics, Srinagarind Hospital, 123 Khon Kaen University, Nai Mueang Sub-District, Mueang District, Khon Kaen Province – 40002, Thailand.
E-mail: winaisiri@yahoo.com

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patient with bone tumor around the knee after resection arthrodesis.
Methods: Patients between 15 and 70 years of age who underwent resection arthrodesis in Srinagarind Hospital >1 year were recruited. Patients were interviewed using a short form-36 questionnaire (social functioning-36 [SF-36] Ver2.0 Thai version) regarding their daily life problems.
Results: Eighteen patients with the mean age of 36.6 years (15–63 years) were included (15 females) in the study. Histological diagnoses were giant cell tumor 10 cases, osteosarcoma seven cases, and low-grade chondrosarcoma one case. Site of lesions was distal femur 15 cases and proximal tibia 3 cases. According to HRQoL, patients have good quality of life (score SF-36 >70) in all domains: Mean score: Physical functioning 75.55 ± 21.88, role physical 71.18 ± 22.70, bodily pain 85.41 ± 22.51, vitality 77.43 ± 16.76, general health 74.44 ± 19.16, SF 83.05 ± 26.40, role emotional 80.09 ± 22.89, and mental health 77.77 ± 21.29. Complications post-operative are broken implants (3 cases, 16.7%) and infections (4 cases, 22.2%).
Conclusion: In patients with bone tumor around the knee after resection, arthrodesis has a good quality of life in all domains in SF-36 version 2.0 questionnaire including function, pain, and mentality.
Keywords: Limb salvage, Arthrodesis, Quality of life, social functioning-36 version 2.0, Osteosarcoma, Giant cell tumor.

References

1. Tarnawska-Pierścińska M, Hołody Ł, Braziewicz J, Królicki L. Bone metastases diagnosis possibilities in studies with the use of 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2011;14:105-8.
2. Sampath SC, Sampath SC, Mosci C, Lutz AM, Willmann JK, Mittra ES, et al. Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone. Clin Nucl Med 2015;40:e173-7.
3. Harisankar CN, Agrawal K, Bhattacharya A, Mittal BR. F-18 fluoro-deoxy-glucose and F-18 sodium fluoride cocktail PET/CT scan in patients with breast cancer having equivocal bone SPECT/CT. Indian J Nucl Med 2014;29:81-6.
4. Roop MJ, Singh B, Singh H, Watts A, Kohli PS, Mittal BR, et al. Incremental value of cocktail 18F-FDG and 18F-NaF PET/CT over 18F-FDG PET/CT alone for characterization of skeletal metastasesin breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2017;42:335-40.
5. Chan HP, Hu C, Yu CC, Huang TC, Peng NJ. Added value of using a cocktail of F-18 sodium fluoride and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose in positron emission tomography/computed tomography for detecting bony metastasis: A case report. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015;94:e687.
6. Iagaru A, Mittra E, Mosci C, Dick DW, Sathekge M, Prakash V, et al. Combined 18F-fluoride and 18F-FDG PET/CT scanning for evaluation of malignancy: Results of an international multicenter trial. J Nucl Med 2013;54:176-83.
7. Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R, Blair SL, Burstein HJ, Cyr A, et al. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology Breast Cancer Version 2; 2016. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf. [Last accessed on 2016 Oct 19].
8. Yoon SH, Kim KS, Kang SY, Song HS, Jo KS, Choi BH, et al. Usefulness of (18)F-fluoride PET/CT in breast cancer patients with osteosclerotic bone metastases. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;47:27-35.
9. Israel O, Goldberg A, Nachtigal A, Militianu D, Bar-Shalom R, Keidar Z, et al. FDG-PET and CT patterns of bone metastases and their relationship to previously administered anti-cancer therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:1280-4.
10. Lapa P, Saraiva T, Silva R, Marques M, Costa G, Lima JP. Superiority of 18F-Fna PET/CT for detecting bone metastases in comparison with other diagnostic ımaging modalities. Acta Med Port 2017;30:53-60.
11. Araz M, Aras G, Küçük ÖN. The role of 18F-NaF PET/CT in metastatic bone disease. J Bone Oncol 2015;4:92-7.
12. Schirrmeister H, Glatting G, Hetzel J, Nüssle K, Arslandemir C, Buck AK. Prospective evaluation of the clinical value of planar bone scans, SPECT, and (18)F-labeled NaF PET in newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1800-4.
13. Piccardo A, Puntoni M, Morbelli S, Massollo M, Bongioanni F, Paparo F, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT is a prognostic biomarker in patients affected by bone metastases from breast cancer in comparison with 18F-naF PET/CT. Nuklearmedizin 2015;54:163-72.
14. Iagaru A, Young P, Mittra E, Dick DW, Herfkens R, Gambhir SS. Pilot prospective evaluation of 99mTc-MDP scintigraphy, 18F NaF PET/CT, 18F FDG PET/CT and whole-body MRI for detection of skeletal metastases. Clin Nucl Med 2013;38:e290-6.
15. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Hanna L, Duan F, Quinn B, Shields AF. 18F-fluoride PET used for treatment monitoring of systemic cancer therapy: Results from the national oncologic PET registry. J Nucl Med 2015;56:222-8.
16. Iagaru A, Mittra E, Dick DW, Gambhir SS. Prospective evaluation of (99m)Tc MDP scintigraphy, (18)F NaF PET/CT, and (18)F FDG PET/CTfor detection of skeletal metastases. Mol Imaging Biol 2012;14:252-9.

  (Abstract    Full Text HTML)   (Download PDF)