What is the patient acceptance when only scapulectomy is possible in case of malignant tumor? A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Scapulectomy is one of the surgical options in the case of malignant lesions in the scapula with an indication of surgical removal. Very few series in the literature have looked at postoperative quality of life and emotional acceptance, particularly in the case of scapulectomy without reconstruction. The objective is to assess the midterm results of scapulectomies in terms of function, quality of life, and acceptance for the patient. Methods With a mean follow-up of 85 months (range 42 months-180 months), 11 scapulectomies for malignant tumors were performed with a mean age of 50 years: 5 partial scapulectomies, 4 total scapulectomies, and 2 subtotal scapulectomies. There were 6 chondrosarcomas, 2 high-grade osteosarcomas, 1 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, and 1 low-grade atypical epithelioid sarcoma. The radio-clinical analysis was focused on functional results and mental health evaluation. Results The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score of 11 scapulectomies was 20 ± 5 at 66% of normal, with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score of 35 ± 26, and the Toronto Extremity Salvage Score of 76%. Patients had controlled pain (mean visual analog scale 1/10). Mobilities of the 11 scapulectomies were correct: average active anterior elevation of 89.5 ± 43 degrees, average abduction of 81 ± 42 degrees, average external rotation of 30 ± 25 degrees, and average internal rotation was at L5. Scapulectomy results in impaired physical and mental health compared with the general population (PCS-12 = -9; MCS-12 = -7). Partial scapulectomy, compared to total scapulectomy, gave better results: Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score (14 ± 1 vs. 24 ± 1 P = .0175), acceptance (45 ± 9 vs. 92 ± 16, P = .0184), mental health (MCS-12: 29 ± 1 vs. 55 ± 4, P = .0175), and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (84 ± 5 vs. 68 ± 7, P = .0195). Partial and subtotal scapulectomies were better accepted (45 ± 9 vs. 86 ± 23, P = .0323) and tolerated (MCS-12: 29 ± 1 vs. 52 ± 6, P = .0099) by the patient compared to total scapulectomy. Conclusion Total or partial scapulectomies without scapula reconstruction remain a disabling procedure performed with consequences on the physical and mental health of the patients. Partial or subtotal scapulectomy should be performed whenever possible because it seems to be associated with a better functional prognosis as well as less poor mental health and emotional acceptance of the patients, even though total scapulectomy may be necessary to obtain a complete curative tumor resection, which is the main goal.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".