MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416499975 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.14.013

THE UTILITY OF INTRAOPERATIVE MARROW MARGIN FROZEN SECTION IN EXTREMITY BONE SARCOMA RESECTION

2025· article· en· W4416499975 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron Gazendam, David Clever, Lianhai Zhang, Andrew S. Griffin, Kim M. Tsoi, Jay S. Wunder, Peter Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrozen section procedureSurgical marginMagnetic resonance imagingFalse positive paradoxSarcomaMargin (machine learning)Bone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Achieving negative margins in the surgical management of bone sarcomas is paramount. Intraoperative frozen section assessment of marrow margins remains the most widely utilized tool to assess bony margins intraoperatively in extremity bone sarcomas. However, frozen sections are technically challenging, resource intensive, and may be of limited utility in the modern era of magnetic resonance imaging. The purpose of the current study was to 1) evaluate the accuracy of intraoperative frozen section marrow margins compared to final pathologic assessment, 2) identify how frozen section analysis compares to gross intraoperative marrow margin assessment, and 3) determine how positive intraoperative frozen sections impact surgical decision making. Consecutive patients from 2010 to 2022 undergoing surgical resection of extremity bone sarcomas that had intraoperative marrow margin frozen section were included for review. The accuracy of both intraoperative frozen section and intraoperative gross margin assessment was compared to the final pathologic assessment utilizing positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Changes in surgical decision making was recorded for patients with positive intraoperative margins. A total of 175 intraoperative frozen section marrow margins in 168 patients with bone sarcomas of the extremities were included. There were four positive intraoperative frozen section margins with two false positives and two false negatives when compared to final pathologic assessment. Gross intraoperative assessment yielded no false positives and 2 false negatives compared to final pathologic assessment. This yielded a PPV of 50% (95% CI 15.6% - 84.4%) and NPV of 98.8% (95% CI, 96.9% - 99.6%) for the frozen section evaluation compared to a PPV of 100% (95% CI, 15.8% -100%) and NPV of 98.8% (95% CI, 97.0% - 99.6%) for gross intraoperative evaluation. Positive intraoperative frozen section margins led to further bony resection in three of the four cases. Frozen section marrow margin assessment did not provide additional clinical value beyond gross marrow margin assessment intraoperatively in extremity bone sarcoma resections. Frozen section assessment demonstrated a low PPV and led to unnecessary additional bone resections. The results of the current study demonstrate that examination of gross marrow margins intraoperatively, in conjunction with pre-operative advanced imaging, is an adequate method for margin assessment and may save time and resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207