Functional Outcomes after Treatment of Aggressive Tumors in the Distal Radius
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We aimed to determine whether wide excision and radiocarpal arthrodesis in patients with aggressive tumors of the distal radius resulted in more significant functional deficit than joint salvage procedures. We compared functional outcomes, surgical complications, and local tumor relapse in 33 consecutive patients. Fourteen patients initially had joint-sparing procedures, whereas 19 underwent wide resection and arthrodesis. At minimum final followup of 18 months (mean, 96 months; range, 18-204 months), local tumor relapse occurred in five of 14 patients after joint salvage versus zero of 19 after arthrodesis. Two of five patients with tumor recurrence retained their native joints, whereas three underwent resection and arthrodesis. Six of 19 patients had complications, including one nonunion, for which we performed additional surgery after arthrodesis. All patients remained disease-free at followup and none developed metastases. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, Toronto Extremity Salvage Score, and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores all indicated more disability after arthrodesis. Persistent pain, radiographic wrist arthritis, and weaker grip strength was seen in some patients following joint salvage. Whenever possible, joint preservation is preferable for the result of better extremity function, but weaker grip, higher local tumor relapse, and late arthritis remain concerns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".