A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

What is the diagnostic accuracy of fluorescence-guided surgery for margin assessment in appendicular bone and soft tissue tumors? - A systematic review of clinical studies. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • - Fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) is a promising technique to determine surgical margins during operations for bone and soft tissue sarcomas, but its use in orthopaedic oncology is still limited.
  • - A review of existing studies showed mixed results for FGS’s effectiveness, with sensitivity ranging from 22.2% to 100% and specificity from 9.38% to 100%, highlighting the varied performance metrics due to differences in study quality.
  • - Overall, while FGS is a viable option for assessing tumor margins, the inconsistency in findings and performance metrics suggests a need for more rigorous studies to improve its reliability in clinical practice.

Article Abstract

Background: Fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) is a novel technique to successfully assess surgical margins intraoperatively. Investigation and adoption of this technique in orthopaedic oncology remains limited.

Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed for this manuscript. Our study was registered on PROSPERO (380520). Studies describing the use of FGS for resection of bone and soft tissue sarcomas (STS) on humans were included. Diagnostic performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV] and accuracy) and margin positivity rate were the outcomes assessed.

Results: Critical appraisal using the Joanna Brigs Institute checklists showed significant concerns for study quality. Sensitivity of FGS ranged from 22.2 % to 100 % in three of the four studies assessing his metrics; one study in appendicular tumors in the pediatric population reported 0 % sensitivity in the three cases included. Specificity ranged from 9.38 % to 100 %. PPV ranged from 14.6 % to 70 % while NPV was between 53.3 % and 100 %. The diagnostic accuracy ranged from 21.62 % to 92.31 %. Margin positivity rate ranged from 2 % to 50 %, with six of the seven studies reporting values between 20 % and 50 %.

Conclusions: FSG is a feasible technique to assess tumor margins in bone and STS. Reported performance metrics and margin positivity rates vary widely between studies due to low study quality and high heterogeneity in dying protocols.

Level Of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2023.102030DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

margin positivity
12
diagnostic accuracy
8
fluorescence-guided surgery
8
bone soft
8
soft tissue
8
technique assess
8
performance metrics
8
positivity rate
8
study quality
8
studies
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!