The Utility of 'Minimal Access and Separation Surgery' in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease

Implant and construct decision-making in metastatic spine tumour surgery: a review of current concepts with a decision-making algorithm

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE

Metastatic spine tumour surgery (MSTS) is an important treatment modality of metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Increase in MSTS has been due to improvements in our oncological treatment, as patients have increased longevity and even those with poorer comorbidities are now being considered for surgery. However, there is currently no guideline on how MSTS surgeons should select the appropriate levels to instrument, and which type of implants should be utilised.

METHODS

The current literature on MSTS was reviewed to study implant and construct decision making factors, with a view to write this narrative review. All studies that were related to instrumentation in MSTS were included.

RESULTS

A total of 58 studies were included in this review. We discuss novel decision-making models that should be taken into account when planning for surgery in patients undergoing MSTS. These factors include the quality of bone for instrumentation, the extent of the construct required for MSTS patients, the use of cement augmentation and the choice of implant. Various studies have advocated for the use of these modalities and demonstrated better outcomes in MSTS patients when used appropriately.

CONCLUSION

We have established a new instrumentation algorithm that should be taken into consideration for patients undergoing MSTS. It serves as an important guide for surgeons treating MSTS, with the continuous evolvement of our treatment capacity in MSD.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

Outcomes and Complications of Surgery for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases; a Comparison Between Patients Aged ≥ 70 and <70

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Physicians may be deterred from operating on elderly patients due to fears of poorer outcomes and complications. We aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical treatment of spinal metastases patients aged ≥70-yrs and <70-yrs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients surgically treated for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and spinal instability between January-2005 to December-2021. Follow-up was till death or minimum 1-year post-surgery. Outcomes included post-operative neurological status, ambulatory status, medical and surgical complications. Two Sample t-test/Mann Whitney U test were used for numerical variables and Pearson Chi-Squared or Fishers Exact test for categorical variables. Survival was presented with a Kaplan-Meier curve. P < .05 was significant.

RESULTS

We identified 412 patients of which 29 (7.1%) patients were excluded due to loss to follow-up and previous surgical treatment. 79 (20.6%) were ≥70-yrs. Age ≥70-yrs patients had poorer ECOG scores (P = .0017) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (P < .001). No significant difference in modified Tokuhashi score (P = .393) was observed with significantly more ≥ prostate (P < .001) and liver (P = .029) cancer in ≥70-yrs. Improved or maintained normal neurological function (P = .934), independent ambulatory status (P = .171), and survival at 6 months (P = .119) and 12 months (P = .659) was not significantly different between both groups. Medical (P = .528) or surgical (P = .466) complication rates and readmission rates (P = .800) were similar.

CONCLUSION

≥70-yrs patients have comparable outcomes to <70-yr old patients with no significant increase in complication rates. Age should not be a determining factor in deciding surgical management of spinal metastases.

The Role and Clinical Outcomes of Endoscopic Spine Surgery of Treating Spinal Metastases; Outcomes of 29 Cases From 8 Countries

OBJECTIVE

We aim to report the outcomes and feasibility of endoscopic spine surgery used to treat symptomatic spinal metastases patients. This is the most extensive series of spinal metastases patients who underwent endoscopic spine surgery.

METHODS

A worldwide collaborative network group of endoscopic spine surgeons, named 'ESSSORG,' was established. Patients diagnosed with spinal metastases who underwent endoscopic spine surgery from 2012 to 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. All related patient data and clinical outcomes were gathered and analyzed before the surgery and the followtime period of 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients from South Korea, Thailand, Taiwan, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and India, were included. The mean age was 59.59 years, and 11 of them were female. The total number of decompressed levels was 40. The technique was relatively equal (15 uniportal; 14 biportal). The average length of admission was 4.41 days. Of all patients with an American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale of D or lower before surgery, 62.06% reported having at least one recovery grade after the surgery. Almost all clinical outcomes parameters statistically significantly improved and maintained from 2 weeks to 6 months after the surgery. Few surgical-related complications (4 cases) were reported.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic spine surgery is a valid option for treating spinal metastases patients as it could yield comparable results to other minimally invasive spine surgery techniques. As the aim is to improve the quality of life, this procedure is valuable and holds value in palliative oncologic spine surgery.

Fully Endoscopic Spine Separation Surgery in Metastatic Disease-Case Series, Technical Notes, and Preliminary Findings

Objective: This report aims to describe the surgical methodology and potential effectiveness of endoscopic separation surgery (ESS) in patients with metastatic spine disease. This concept may reduce the invasiveness of the procedure, which can potentially speed up the wound healing process and, thus, the possibility of faster application of radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: In this study, separation surgery for preparing patients for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) was performed with fully endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) followed by percutaneous screw fixation (PSF). Results: Three patients with metastatic spine disease in the thoracic spine were treated with fully endoscopic spine separation surgery. The first case resulted in the progression of paresis symptoms that resulted in disqualification from further oncological treatment. The remaining two patients achieved satisfactory clinical and radiological effects and were referred for additional radiotherapy. Conclusions: With advancements in medical technology, such as endoscopic visualization, and new tools for coagulation, we can treat more and more spine diseases. Until now, spine metastasis was not an indication for the use of endoscopy. This method is very technically challenging and risky, especially at such an early stage of application, due to variations in the patient's condition, morphological diversity, and the nature of metastatic lesions in the spine. Further trials are needed to determine whether this new approach to treating patients with spine metastases is a promising breakthrough or a dead end.