Is amputation better than limb preservation treatment? People used to think that amputation is more complete and has lower recurrence rate than limb preservation surgery. Even many non-specialists have this idea. However, controlled studies have shown that there is no significant difference in local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate and survival rate between standard limb preservation treatment and amputation treatment. In other words, amputation cannot cure malignant bone tumor disease completely. However, the loss of appearance and function of the residual limb after amputation is a great test for the psychological tolerance of patients and their families, which is the biggest difference between amputation surgery and limb preservation treatment. Therefore, patients with malignant bone tumor with limb preservation conditions prefer limb preservation treatment. What kind of malignant bone tumor patients are suitable for limb preservation treatment? Not all patients with malignant bone tumors are suitable for limb preservation therapy. The following basic conditions must be met for limb preservation surgery: 1. The tumor can be excised with the best surgical border, the premise of limb preservation is that the tumor can be excised completely. 2. 2. The main blood vessels and important nerves are not invaded. 3. The recurrence rate of limb preservation treatment should not exceed that of amputation. 4. The function of the preserved limb should be better than that of the prosthesis. Many cases that had to be treated with amputation in the past can now be treated with limb preservation, thanks to the application of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The advantages of limb preservation surgery compared with amputation: First, limb preservation surgery preserves the appearance of the patient’s limb, which has obvious advantages compared with amputation, both from the patient’s psychological point of view and social cognition. On the other hand, amputation can cause damage to the patient’s limb function, although it can be partially compensated by wearing a prosthesis, but the overall effect is obviously inferior to that of limb-preserving surgery. High level amputation is certainly the most radical surgical procedure, but it can result in severe functional loss after surgery. And there is no statistically significant difference in the healing rate between amputation and limb-preserving treatment. Because of these factors, patients now generally choose limb preservation surgery. In conclusion, limb preservation therapy is currently the first choice for the treatment of malignant bone tumors, and patients who do not have limb preservation conditions still need amputation therapy.