Outcomes of surgical treatments of spinal metastases: a prospective study

Preoperative Performance Status Threshold for Favorable Surgical Outcome in Metastatic Spine Disease

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Surgical treatment is an integral component of multimodality management of metastatic spine disease but must be balanced against the risk of surgery-related morbidity and mortality, making tailored surgical counseling a clinical challenge. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential predictive value of the preoperative performance status for surgical outcome in patients with spinal metastases.

METHODS

Performance status was determined using the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS), and surgical outcome was classified as "favorable" or "unfavorable" based on postoperative changes in neurological function and perioperative complications. The correlation between preoperative performance status and surgical outcome was assessed to determine a KPS-related performance threshold.

RESULTS

A total of 463 patients were included. The mean age was 63 years (range: 22-87), and the mean preoperative KPS was 70 (range: 30-100). Analysis of clinical outcome in relation to the preoperative performance status revealed a KPS threshold between 40% and 50% with a relative risk of an unfavorable outcome of 65.7% in KPS ≤40% compared with the relative chance for a favorable outcome of 77.1% in KPS ≥50%. Accordingly, we found significantly higher rates of preserved or restored ambulatory function in KPS ≥50% (85.7%) than in KPS ≤40% (48.6%; P < .001) as opposed to a significantly higher risk of perioperative mortality in KPS ≤40% (11.4%) than in KPS ≥50% (2.1%, P = .012).

CONCLUSION

Our results underline the predictive value of the KPS in metastatic spine patients for counseling and decision-making. The study suggests an overall clinical benefit of surgical treatment of spinal metastases in patients with a preoperative KPS score ≥50%, while a high risk of unfavorable outcome outweighing the potential clinical benefit from surgery is encountered in patients with a KPS score ≤40%.

Outcomes in Patients with Spinal Metastases Managed with Surgical Intervention

BACKGROUND

Spinal metastases are a significant cause of morbidity in patients with advanced cancer, and management often requires surgical intervention. Although prior studies have identified factors that influence outcomes with surgery, the ability of these factors to predict outcomes remains unclear in the era of contemporary therapies, and there is a need to better identify patients who are likely to benefit from surgery.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, retrospective analysis to evaluate risk factors for poor outcomes in patients with spinal metastases treated with surgery. The primary outcome was mortality at 180 days.

RESULTS

A total of 128 patients were identified. Age ≥ 65 years at surgery (p = 0.0316), presence of extraspinal metastases (p = 0.0110), and ECOG performance scores >1 (p = 0.0397) were associated with mortality at 180 days on multivariate analysis. These factors and BMI ≤ 30 mg/kg2 (p = 0.0008) were also associated with worse overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Age > 65, extraspinal metastases, and performance status scores >1 are factors associated with mortality at 180 days in patients with spinal metastases treated with surgery. Patients with these factors and BMI ≤ 30 mg/kg2 had worse overall survival. Our results support multidisciplinary discussions regarding the benefits and risks associated with surgery in patients with these risk factors.

Characterization and Treatment of Spinal Tumors

The prevalence of spinal tumors is rare in comparison to brain tumors which encompass most central nervous system tumors. Tumors of the spine can be divided into primary and metastatic tumors with the latter being the most common presentation. Primary tumors are subdivided based on their location on the spinal column and in the spinal cord into intramedullary, intradural extramedullary, and primary bone tumors. Back pain is a common presentation in spine cancer patients; however, other radicular pain may be present. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the imaging modality of choice for intradural extramedullary and intramedullary tumors. Plain radiographs are used in the initial diagnosis of primary bone tumors while Computed tomography (CT) and MRI may often be necessary for further characterization. Complete surgical resection is the treatment of choice for spinal tumors and may be curative for well circumscribed lesions. However, intralesional resection along with adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy can be indicated for patients that would experience increased morbidity from damage to nearby neurological structures caused by resection with wide margins. Even with the current treatment options, the prognosis for aggressive spinal cancer remains poor. Advances in novel treatments including molecular targeting, immunotherapy and stem cell therapy provide the potential for greater control of malignant and metastatic tumors of the spine.

Spinal Metastasis in Multiple Primary Malignancies Involving Lung Cancer: Clinical Characteristics and Survival

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of multiple primary malignancies (MPM) has increased in recent decades. Our aim was to evaluate incidence, clinical features, and survival in cases of spinal metastases from MPM in which one of the malignancies is lung cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database of lung cancer patients with spinal metastasis and extracted all cases of MPM.

RESULTS

Among 275 patients who had spinal metastasis with lung cancer as one of the diagnoses, 21 (7.6%) patients with MPM were identified. Mean patient age was 68.5 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.3-71.7). The most common cancers diagnosed in addition to lung cancer were breast cancer (5 patients, 24%), upper aerodigestive tract cancer (4 patients, 19%), and prostate cancer (4 patients, 19%). Eighteen (86%) patients walked independently, and 3 (14%) patients walked with help. Seventeen (80.9%) patients had a good Karnofsky performance scale score. The median survivals from the date of first cancer diagnosis, last cancer diagnosis, and spinal metastasis diagnosis were 109.8 months (95% CI, 23.5-196.1), 17.8 months (95% CI, 5.8-29.8), and 10.3 months (95% CI, 5.4-15.2), respectively. Actual rates of survival at 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months from the date of spinal metastasis diagnosis were 81%, 42.9%, and 23.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study is the first series to our knowledge to show that survival of patients with spinal metastasis and MPM involving lung cancer is not clearly inferior to that of patients with spinal metastasis and lung cancer alone.

SORG algorithm to predict 3- and 12-month survival in metastatic spinal disease: a cross-sectional population-based retrospective study

PURPOSE

In this study, we wished to compare statistically the novel SORG algorithm in predicting survival in spine metastatic disease versus currently used methods.

METHODS

We recruited 40 patients with spinal metastatic disease who were operated at Geneva University Hospitals by the Neurosurgery or Orthopedic teams between the years of 2015 and 2020. We did an ROC analysis in order to determine the accuracy of the SORG ML algorithm and nomogram versus the Tokuhashi original and revised scores.

RESULTS

The analysis of data of our independent cohort shows a clear advantage in terms of predictive ability of the SORG ML algorithm and nomogram in comparison with the Tokuhashi scores. The SORG ML had an AUC of 0.87 for 90 days and 0.85 for 1 year. The SORG nomogram showed a predictive ability at 90 days and 1 year with AUCs of 0.87 and 0.76 respectively. These results showed excellent discriminative ability as compared with the Tokuhashi original score which achieved AUCs of 0.70 and 0.69 and the Tokuhashi revised score which had AUCs of 0.65 and 0.71 for 3 months and 1 year respectively.

CONCLUSION

The predictive ability of the SORG ML algorithm and nomogram was superior to currently used preoperative survival estimation scores for spinal metastatic disease.

Comparison of open versus minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of thoracolumbar metastases

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have been developed for the surgical treatment of thoracolumbar spinal metastases to reduce the morbidity associated with the operation. The purpose of our study was to compare the mean length of stay, change in pain levels, neurological symptoms, complications and survival after open versus MIS surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective study based on a register of patients treated for vertebral metastases between January 2014 and October 2016. The collection included demographic data, cancer-related data, clinical data, the characteristics of the surgery, the length of stay, assessment of pain and the occurrence of death. These data were compared between open and MIS surgery groups.

RESULTS

Out of 59 patients, 35 were treated with open surgery and 24 were treated with MIS surgery. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, gender and body mass index. Breast, kidney, prostate and lung cancers were the most frequent primary tumors. Prognostic and instability scores were comparable. Short- and medium-term pain assessment showed comparable results. Median survival was 208 days in the open surgery group and 224days in the MIS group (p=0.5299).

CONCLUSION

MIS techniques aim to limit the surgical approach and allow a faster introduction of adjuvant treatments than after open surgery. Our study did not find any differences between open and MIS surgery in terms of pain, neurological evolution or survival time in patients treated for thoracolumbar spinal metastases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

Impact of Spinal Instrumentation on Neurological Outcome in Patients with Intermediate Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS)

Background: Adequate assessment of spinal instability using the spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS) frequently guides surgical therapy in spinal epidural osseous metastases and subsequently influences neurological outcome. However, how to surgically manage ‘impending instability’ at SINS 7−12 most appropriately remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of spinal instrumentation in patients with SINS 7−12 with regards to neurological outcome. Methods: We screened 683 patients with spinal epidural metastases treated at our interdisciplinary spine center. The preoperative SINS was assessed to determine spinal instability and neurological status was defined using the Frankel score. Patients were dichotomized according to being treated by instrumentation surgery and neurological outcomes were compared. Additionally, a subgroup analysis of groups with SINS of 7−9 and 10−12 was performed. Results: Of 331 patients with a SINS of 7−12, 76.1% underwent spinal instrumentation. Neurological outcome did not differ significantly between instrumented and non-instrumented patients (p = 0.612). Spinal instrumentation was performed more frequently in SINS 10−12 than in SINS 7−9 (p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed no significant differences in neurological outcome between instrumented and non-instrumented patients in either SINS 7−9 (p = 0.278) or SINS 10−12 (p = 0.577). Complications occurred more frequently in instrumented than in non-instrumented patients (p = 0.016). Conclusions: Our data suggest that a SINS of 7−12 alone might not warrant the increased surgical risks of additional spinal instrumentation.

Does the Region of the Spine Involved with Metastatic Tumor Affect Outcomes of Surgical Treatments?

OBJECTIVE

Spinal metastases occur primarily in the thoracic spine (50%-60%), less commonly in the lumbar (30%-35%), and, infrequently, in the cervical spine (10%-15%). There has been only 1 study with a limited population comparing the postoperative outcome among cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine metastasis. The aim of this study is to identify whether the region of surgically treated spinal metastasis affects postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients with spinal metastasis was performed. The collected data were as follows: age, gender, smoking history, tumor histology, revised Tokuhashi score, preoperative and postoperative American Spinal Injury Association score, region of spinal metastasis, ambulatory status, surgical approach, surgery time, blood loss, complications, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain relief, postoperative adjuvant therapy, and survival. Data were analyzed to identify the factors affecting the survival and postoperative functional outcome.

RESULTS

We studied 191 patients with spinal metastasis including 47 cervical spine metastases, 96 thoracic spine metastases, and 48 lumbar spine metastases, with a mean age of 60.91 ± 9.72 years. The overall median survival was 7 months (95% confidence interval, 2.9-20.63 months). Univariate analysis showed that region of the spine involved with metastasis did not significantly affect the survival and postoperative motor function improvement. Multivariate analysis showed that revised Tokuhashi score, postoperative radiotherapy, and postoperative chemotherapy were independent factors affecting survival. The rate of 30-day complications among patients with different regions of spine metastasis did not reach significance.

CONCLUSIONS

The postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for metastases are not affected by the region of the spine.

The role of percutaneous transarterial embolization in the management of spinal bone tumors: a literature review

PURPOSE

Spinal bone tumors include a heterogeneous broad of primary or metastatic lesions that may present as incidental findings or manifest with painful symptoms and pathological fractures. Optimal management of spine bone lesions is often difficult and treatment algorithms are usually solidly based on surgery. We aimed to evaluate the contribution of trans-arterial embolization in this field, with particular attention to the procedure efficacy, technical difficulties and complications.

METHODS

We present a literature review on the role of trans-arterial embolization in the management of spinal bone tumors, both primary and metastatic, evaluating its contribution as preoperative treatment, palliative procedure and standalone curative strategy.

RESULTS

Trans-arterial embolization provides an important contribution to reducing surgery hemorrhagic risks, offering a better visualization of the operating field, and possibly increasing tumor susceptibility to chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Nonetheless, it plays an important part in pain palliation, with the unquestionable advantage of being easily repeatable in case of necessity. Its curative role as a standalone therapy is still subject of debate, and at the present time, satisfactory results have been recorded only in the treatment of aneurysmal bone cysts.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous trans-arterial embolization has established as a highly useful minimally invasive procedure in the management of spinal bone lesions, particularly as adjuvant preoperative therapy and palliative treatment.

Interhospital transfer status for spinal metastasis patients in the United States is associated with more severe clinical presentations and higher rates of inpatient complications

OBJECTIVE

In patients with metastatic spinal disease (MSD), interhospital transfer can potentially impact clinical outcomes as the possible benefits of transferring a patient to a higher level of care must be weighed against the negative effects associated with potential delays in treatment. While the association of clinical outcomes and transfer status has been examined in other specialties, the relationship between transfer status, complications, and risk of mortality in patients with MSD has yet to be explored. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of transfer status on in-hospital mortality and clinical outcomes in patients diagnosed with MSD.

METHODS

The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was retrospectively queried for adult patients diagnosed with vertebral pathological fracture and/or spinal cord compression in the setting of metastatic disease between 2012 and 2014. Demographics, baseline characteristics (e.g., metastatic spinal cord compression [MSCC] and paralysis), comorbidities, type of intervention, and relevant patient outcomes were controlled in a multivariable logistic regression model to analyze the association of transfer status with patient outcomes.

RESULTS

Within the 10,360 patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria, higher rates of MSCC (50.2% vs 35.9%, p < 0.001) and paralysis (17.3% vs 8.4%, p < 0.001) were observed in patients transferred between hospitals compared to those directly admitted. In univariable analysis, a higher percentage of transferred patients underwent surgical intervention (p < 0.001) when compared with directly admitted patients. After controlling for significant covariates and surgical intervention, transferred patients were more likely to develop in-hospital complications (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52, p < 0.001), experience prolonged length of stay (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.16-1.52, p < 0.001), and have a discharge disposition other than home (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.46-1.98, p < 0.001), with no significant difference in inpatient mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MSD who were transferred between hospitals demonstrated more severe clinical presentations and higher rates of inpatient complications compared to directly admitted patients, despite demonstrating no difference in in-hospital mortality rates.