The Effect of Resection Margin on Local Recurrence and Survival in High Grade Soft Tissue Sarcoma of the Extremities: How Far Is Far Enough?

Abstract

Simple SummaryIn soft tissue sarcomas the width of surgical margins after resection determines the extent of surgery and the function after resection. But how far is really necessary? 305 patients with deep-seated, G2/3 soft tissue sarcomas of the extremity, the trunk wall, or the pelvis were reviewed. The 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 82%. Overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 66%. Positive (contaminated) margins worsened LRFS and OS. A margin of >10 mm did not improve LRFS and OS as compared to one of >5 mm. A resection margin of <1 mm showed a trend but not significantly better LRFS or OS compared to a contaminated margin. In conclusion the margin should at least be free of tumor, in sound tissue. A margin of >5 mm sound tissue seems to be sufficient. Resecting more tissue does not benefit the patient.Background: The significance of surgical margins after resection of soft tissue sarcomas in respect to local-recurrence-free survival and overall survival is evaluated. Methods: A total of 305 patients with deep-seated, G2/3 soft tissue sarcomas (STS) of the extremity, the trunk wall, or the pelvis were reviewed. The margin was defined according to the Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer (FNCLCC) classification system (R0-2), the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer (UICC) classification (R + 1 mm) for which a margin <1 mm is included into the R1 group, and in groups of <1 mm, 1–5 mm, >5 mm, or >10 mm. Results: Of these patients, 31 (10.2%) had a contaminated margin, 64 (21%) a margin of <1 mm, 123 (40.3%) a margin of 1–5 mm, 47 (15.4%) a margin of >5 mm, and 40 (13.1%) a margin of >10 mm. The 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 81.6%. Overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 65.9%. Positive margins worsened LRFS and OS. A margin of >10 mm did not improve LRFS and OS as compared to one of >5 mm. Conclusions: A resection margin of <1 mm showed a trend but not significantly better LRFS or OS compared to a contaminated margin. This finding supports use of the UICC classification. A margin of more than 10 mm did not improve LRFS or OS.