Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
Aims Surgical management of intermediate and malignant tumours in the pelvis is complex. Complications are frequent and either related to the surgery itself or to post-surgical failure of the reconstruction technique. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at analyzing all reported complications following PI to PIII pelvic resections for intermediate and malignant tumours. Methods Based on a systematic literature search on PubMed adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, 1,683 study records were identifed, of which we included 90 original studies published until 22 July 2025. Overall complication rates were assessed with random-efec ts meta-analysis. Difer ences in complication rates between reconstruction types (i.e. megaprosthetic, mostly biological, none) were evaluated with meta regression analysis. Results Data on 2,199 patients (1,250 males (57%)) with mainly PI to PIII pelvic resections were analyzed. The most common reconstruction types were custom-made implants (21%; n = 451) and ice-cream cone prostheses (14%; n = 312). Pooled rates of infections, wound healing problems, nerve injuries, and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) amounted to 15% (95% CI 12% to 18%), 13% (95% CI 10% to 15%), 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%), and 4% (95% CI 2% to 6%), respectively. Further, pooled implant revision/removal and secondary external hemipelvectomy rates were 14% (95% CI 11% to 17%) and 4% (95% CI 3% to 5%). Mostly biological reconstructions were associated with higher rates of nerve injuries (p < 0.001), construct failures (p = 0.010), and secondary implant revision/removal (p = 0.003) compared to megaprosthetic reconstruction. Further, biological reconstructions were associated with increased secondary external hemipelvectomy rates compared to megaprosthetic reconstructions (p = 0.005) or no reconstructions (p = 0.001). Conclusion Treatment of pelvic malignancies is challenging, with technically demanding resections and complex reconstructions. Across all reconstruction techniques following sacrum-sparing pelvic resections, infections and wound healing problems are the most common complications, yet there is also a considerable proportion of patients with neurovascular complications and DVTs.
Complications of PI to PIII hemipelvic resections for intermediate and malignant tumours
Aims Surgical management of intermediate and malignant tumours in the pelvis is complex. Complications are frequent and either related to the surgery itself or to post-surgical failure of the reconstruction technique. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims at analyzing all reported complications following PI to PIII pelvic resections for intermediate and malignant tumours. Methods Based on a systematic literature search on PubMed adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, 1,683 study records were identifed, of which we included 90 original studies published until 22 July 2025. Overall complication rates were assessed with random-efec ts meta-analysis. Difer ences in complication rates between reconstruction types (i.e. megaprosthetic, mostly biological, none) were evaluated with meta regression analysis. Results Data on 2,199 patients (1,250 males (57%)) with mainly PI to PIII pelvic resections were analyzed. The most common reconstruction types were custom-made implants (21%; n = 451) and ice-cream cone prostheses (14%; n = 312). Pooled rates of infections, wound healing problems, nerve injuries, and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) amounted to 15% (95% CI 12% to 18%), 13% (95% CI 10% to 15%), 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%), and 4% (95% CI 2% to 6%), respectively. Further, pooled implant revision/removal and secondary external hemipelvectomy rates were 14% (95% CI 11% to 17%) and 4% (95% CI 3% to 5%). Mostly biological reconstructions were associated with higher rates of nerve injuries (p < 0.001), construct failures (p = 0.010), and secondary implant revision/removal (p = 0.003) compared to megaprosthetic reconstruction. Further, biological reconstructions were associated with increased secondary external hemipelvectomy rates compared to megaprosthetic reconstructions (p = 0.005) or no reconstructions (p = 0.001). Conclusion Treatment of pelvic malignancies is challenging, with technically demanding resections and complex reconstructions. Across all reconstruction techniques following sacrum-sparing pelvic resections, infections and wound healing problems are the most common complications, yet there is also a considerable proportion of patients with neurovascular complications and DVTs.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3603765
Citazioni
ND
ND
ND
ND
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.