The effect of surgery in tenosynovial giant cell tumours as measured by patient-reported outcomes on quality of life and joint function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and joint function in tenosynovial giant cell tumour (TGCT) patients before and after surgical treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study run in two Dutch referral centres assessed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)) in 359 consecutive patients with localized- and diffuse-type TGCT of large joints. Patients with recurrent disease (n = 121) and a wait-and-see policy (n = 32) were excluded. Collected data were analyzed at specified time intervals preoperatively (baseline) and/or postoperatively up to five years. RESULTS: A total of 206 TGCT patients, 108 localized- and 98 diffuse-type, were analyzed. Median age at diagnosis of localized- and diffuse-type was 41 years (interquartile range (IQR) 29 to 49) and 37 years (IQR 27 to 47), respectively. SF-36 analyses showed statistically significant and clinically relevant deteriorated preoperative and immediate postoperative scores compared with general Dutch population means, depending on subscale and TGCT subtype. After three to six months of follow-up, these scores improved to general population means and continued to be fairly stable over the following years. VAS scores, for both subtypes, showed no statistically significant or clinically relevant differences pre- or postoperatively. In diffuse-type patients, the improvement in median WOMAC score was statistically significant and clinically relevant preoperatively versus six to 24 months postoperatively, and remained up to five years' follow-up. CONCLUSION: Patients with TGCT report a better HRQoL and joint function after surgery. Pain scores, which vary hugely between patients and in patients over time, did not improve. A disease-specific PROM would help to decipher the impact of TGCT on patients' daily life and functioning in more detail. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:272-280.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".