Rehabilitation and functional result after total scapulectomy without potentization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although chondrosarcomas are common malignant bone tumors, the incidence of scapular chondrosarcoma is relatively rare. Surgical resection is the fundamental treatment as this type of tumor has limited response to radio and chemotherapy. Limb sparing solutions with or without scapular protetization are nowadays preferred. Rehabilitation of this sort of procedure is challenging and program design depends greatly on the level of bone and soft tissue preservation. Final functional result correlates with glenoid and rotator cuff function preservation. The authors present a case of a 41 year-old male with scapular chondrosarcoma grade I who underwent Malawer III surgical treatment. Surgical team decided for a limb sparing procedure without scapular protetization. Reconstruction procedure included humeral head fixation to the distal end of clavicle and to a Trevira® mesh. The patient underwent a 12-week individualized rehabilitation program. Follow-up with clinical examination and functional scale assessment (Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score for Upper Extremity) was performed at first evaluation (M0), one month (M1) three months (M2) and two-year time (M3). At the end of the 12 weeks rehabilitation program, patient had limited active shoulder range of motion and strength. Mobility and motor strength on distal segments (elbow and hand) were preserved but overall strength and functionality of left upper extremity were compromised. To our knowledge, there are few reports of the functional results on patients with total scapulectomy and detailing the rehabilitation program. We believe rehabilitation approach to these patients should be tailored to surgical approach and follow-up must include standardized functional and clinical evaluation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".