99 – UNPLANNED EXCISION OF SOFT TISSUE SARCOMAS – WHAT IS THE EFFECT ON PATIENT OUTCOME?

Abstract

Purpose: Patients are often referred to tertiary care centers after unplanned excision of soft tissue sarcomas. In situations where the tumour is small and superficial, the situation can often easily be salvaged by re-excision of the tumour bed. However, if the original tumour is large, deep to fascia or directly adjacent to bone or neurovascular structures, the salvage procedure often becomes more complex and morbid. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of unplanned excision of “high-risk” soft tissue sarcomas on patient outcome.

Method: We reviewed our prospectively collected sarcoma database from 1989 to 2006. Patients who underwent definitive resection of a soft tissue sarcoma at our centre were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on whether or not they had undergone initial unplanned resection of their tumour prior to referral to our centre for definitive management. Low risk patients who had tumours that were less than 5 cm in diameter, superficial to fascia, and not overlying bone or neurovascular structures were excluded.

Results: A total of 1034 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 385 (37%) patients had undergone an unplanned excision prior to referral, while 649 (63%) patients were referred to our centre with an intact tumour without prior unplanned excision. There was a higher percentage of high grade (61% vs. 50%) and deep tumours (88% vs. 65%) in the unplanned excision group, but the mean tumour diameter was smaller in the unplanned excision group (5.9 cm) compared to the control group (10.6 cm). There was no difference between the groups in terms of rate of amputation, necessity for flaps for coverage, and local recurrence-free survival. Complications were more common in the control group (34%) than the unplanned excision group (20%, p< 0.0005, Chi-square). 5-year overall (p< 0.00005, log rank) and metastasis-free (p< 0.00005, log rank) survival were higher in the unplanned excision group. There was no difference in TESS, MSTS87 or MSTS93 functional outcome scores between the groups.

Conclusion: Patients referred to a tertiary sarcoma centre after unplanned resection of a soft tissue sarcoma can still be salvaged with appropriate multidisciplinary care. Patients referred after unplanned excision appear to fare at least as well as those initially resected at our centre, and fare better in terms of some outcomes studied. The majority of this difference can likely be explained by significant differences in important prognostic factors such as grade, size and depth between the unplanned excision group and control group initially managed at our centre. Patients referred after unplanned excisions appear not to have as dismal an outcome as has been previously reported.