header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 459 - 459
1 Jul 2010
Müller C Winter C Vieth V Boos J Hardes J Gosheger G Rosenbaum D
Full Access

Several studies report a diminished BMD as a consequence of childhood cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of an exercise intervention on BMD during treatment, since limited mobility is characteristic for cancer therapy and is a major determinant for bone loss.

We analysed DXA scans (Lunar Prodigy, GE Healthcare) of 53 patients (range 8 to 21 years at time of diagnosis) perioperatively (n=49), six (n=38) and twelve months (n=18) after surgery. Scans were performed for the established sites of the lumbar spine and both femora, as well as experimentally for both calcanei. Areal BMD was corrected to obtain volumetric BMD using the model of Kröger.

For both groups, areal and calculated volumetric BMD values were similar at the lumbar spine at time of surgery, as were the differences between affected and not affected femur and calcaneus. The six and twelve months postoperative measurements revealed higher volumetric and areal BMD at the lumbar spine for the intervention group, although significant differences were only found for volumetric BMD values six months postoperatively.

Furthermore, a comparison of both groups showed that the loss in bone density of the affected lower extremity was less pronounced for the intervention group: differences between affected and not affected femur were 9% to 73% higher in the femur and 20% to 29% higher in the calcaneus for the control group.

Previous reports dealing with diminished BMD in pediatric cancer patients were confirmed in this study. However, differences found in BMD between both groups indicate that an exercise intervention during treatment, consisting primarily of strength and endurance training, may inhibit bone loss in pediatric sarcoma patients. Furthermore, the calcaneal site may be an alternative when the determination of femur BMD is not feasible.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 92-B, Issue SUPP_III | Pages 459 - 459
1 Jul 2010
Winter C Mueller C Hardes J Boos J Gosheger G Rosenbaum D
Full Access

Pediatric patients with lower extremity sarcoma often experience long lasting restrictions concerning physical activity and walking due to the required off-loading of the limb and other consequences of surgeries. Activity promotion during treatment in addition to physiotherapy could improve patients’ activity levels and walking capabilities.

In the present study we investigated the ambulatory activity of 31 pediatric patients (13.7 ± 3.1 years, 1.63 ± 0.15 m, 51.9 ± 15 kg, 19.3 ± 3.7 kg/m2) with Osteosarcoma or Ewing sarcoma at the lower limb using the StepWatch™ Activity monitor (SAM; Orthocare Innovations, USA). Sixteen patients regularly underwent supervised exercise interventions during inpatient stays, 15 did not receive any additional intervention. Step activities were measured for seven consecutive days during home stays at five different points in time, to determine a possible transfer of activity to everyday life.

Patients without intervention assembled considerably less steps than those in the intervention group. Before surgery they reached 25.4% of the intervention group (total n=16), six weeks after surgery 40% (total n= 8), after three months 46% (total n=10), after six months 72% (total n=13) and after one year 90%. However differences only reached significance at the first measurement.

Data presented must be considered as preliminary. Not all patients could be measured at all appointments due to impaired walking ability. Nevertheless activity promoting interventions during inpatient stays seem to have a positive influence on patients’ daily walking activity. Though the differences between the groups are not significant they are considerable. Especially during treatment – as reflected by the first three measurements- patients could benefit from additional interventions exceeding typical therapy regimes. Interventions should be individualized to the patients’ capabilities. Conclusions concerning tumor location or surgical procedures are not yet possible. Future research should furthermore concentrate on the effects of activity promotion on other fields of well-being.