Does the anatomical region predict blood loss or neurological deficits in embolized renal cancer spine metastases? A single-center experience with 31 patients

Efficacy of Subtraction Computed Tomography Arteriography During Preoperative Embolization in Spinal Tumors

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of subtraction computed tomography arteriography (s-CTA) during preoperative embolization in spinal tumors.

Methods

The study analyzed 17 vertebrae in 13 patients who underwent preoperative embolization before spinal fixation surgery for malignant spinal tumors to decrease blood loss at our hospital from 2019 to 2021. Their ages ranged from 56 to 88 years (average, 73.5 years). Metastatic bone tumors were most common, including five cases originating as lung carcinomas and three as renal cancers. After digital subtraction angiography of selected tumor-feeding arteries and non-subtraction CTA (ns-CTA) were performed, s-CTA was conducted using data obtained from both procedures. A clarity score of the boundary between the normal bone and tumor was derived for each patient, which was then classified into four grades (good, 3 points; fair, 2 points; faint, 1 point; poor, 0 points) by two experienced radiologists, followed by a comparison between the s-CTA and ns-CTA groups using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

Results

Clarity scores were significantly higher in the s-CTA group than in the ns-CTA group (P < 0.001). The agreement of Cohen's coefficients between the two radiologists was κ = 0.724 in s-CTA scoring and κ = 0.622 in ns-CTA scoring, which were moderately matched. Seven arteries were not embolized due to insufficient tumor contrast enhancement and their poor relation to the surgical invasion zone. No complications were observed during or after embolization.

Conclusion

S-CTA successfully distinguished between tumor and normal bone and may help avoid unnecessary embolization.

Comparison of intraoperative blood loss and perioperative complications between preoperative embolization and nonembolization combined with spinal tumor surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to comparatively evaluate intraoperative blood loss (IBL) and perioperative complications between preoperative embolization (PE) and nonembolization (NE) combined with spinal tumor surgeries as well as to determine the subgroup of spinal tumor surgeries suitable for PE.

METHODS

A systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE and an additional search by reference lists of the retrieved studies were undertaken by two reviewers. The mean IBL and perioperative complication rate were employed as the effect size in the general quantitative synthesis through direct calculation. Meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and weighted mean difference (WMD) of IBL and the odds ratio (OR) of complications. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

The reviewers selected 17 published studies for the general quantitative synthesis and meta-analyses. The mean IBL of spinal tumor surgeries was 1786.3 mL in the NE group and 1716.4 mL in the PE group. The mean IBL between the two groups was similar. The pooled WMD and SMD of IBL in spinal tumor surgeries was 324.15 mL (95% CI 89.50-1640.9, p = 0.007) and 0.398 (95% CI 0.114-0.682, p = 0.006), respectively. The reduction of the PE group compared with the NE group for the rates of major complications and major hemorrhagic complications were 7.80% and 5.71%, respectively. The risk of PE-related complications in the PE group was only 1.53% more than in the PE group. The pooled OR of major complications in spinal tumor surgeries was 1.426 (95% CI 0.760-2.674; p = 0.269).

CONCLUSIONS

PE may be suitable for spinal tumor surgeries and some subgroups. From the perspective of complications, PE may also be a feasible option for spinal tumor surgeries.