How good are the outcomes of instrumented debulking operations for symptomatic spinal metastases and how long do they stand? A subgroup analysis in the global spine tumor study group database.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases have been demonstrated, largely based on series of patients undergoing debulking and instrumentation operations. However, as cancer treatments improve and overall survival lengths increase, the incidence of recurrent spinal cord compression after debulking may increase. The aim of the current paper is to document the postoperative evolution of neurological function, pain, and quality of life following debulking and instrumentation in the Global Spine Tumor Study Group (GSTSG) database. METHODS: The GSTSG database is a prospective multicenter data repository of consecutive patients that underwent surgery for a symptomatic spinal metastasis. For the present analysis, patients were selected from the database that underwent decompressive debulking surgery with instrumentation. Preoperative tumor type, Tomita and Tokuhashi scores, EQ-5D, Frankel, Karnofsky, and postoperative complications, survival, EQ-5D, Frankel, Karnofsky, and pain numeric rating scores (NRS) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 914 patients underwent decompressive debulking surgery with instrumentation and had documented follow-up until death or until 2 years post surgery. Median preoperative Karnofsky performance index was 70. A total of 656 patients (71.8%) had visceral metastases and 490 (53.6%) had extraspinal bone metastases. Tomita scores were evenly distributed above (49.1%) and below or equal to 5 (50.9%), and Tokuhashi scores almost evenly distributed below or equal to 8 (46.3%) and above 8 (53.7%). Overall, 12-month survival after surgery was 56.3%. The surgery resulted in EQ-5D health status improvement and NRS pain reduction that was maintained throughout follow-up. Frankel scores improved at first follow-up in 25.0% of patients, but by 12 months neurological deterioration was observed in 18.8%. CONCLUSION: We found that palliative debulking and instrumentation surgeries were performed throughout all Tomita and Tokuhashi categories. These surgeries reduced pain scores and improved quality of life up to 2 years after surgery. After initial improvement, a proportion of patients experienced neurological deterioration by 1 year, but the majority of patients remained stable.

A novel risk calculator to predict outcome after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases; use of a large prospective patient database to personalise surgical management.

AIM: Surgery for spinal metastases can improve symptoms, but sometimes complications can negate the benefits. Operations may have different indications, complexities and risks, and the choice for an individual is a tailor-made personalised decision. Previous prognostic scoring systems are becoming out of date and inaccurate. We designed a risk calculator to estimate survival after surgery, to inform clinicians and patients when making management decisions. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed, including 1430 patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery. Of them, 1264 patients from 20 centres were used for model development using a Cox frailty model. Calibration slope, D-statistic and C-index were used for model validation based on 166 patients. Follow-up was to death or minimum of 2 years after surgery. Pre-operative indices (examination findings, pain, Karnofsky physical functioning score, and radiology) were assessed. RESULTS: An algorithm to predict survival was constructed including the tumour type, ambulatory status, analgesic use, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, number of spinal metastases, previous radiotherapy or chemotherapy, presence of visceral metastases, cervical or thoracic spine involvement, as predictors. An Internet-based risk calculator was developed based on this algorithm, with similar or improved accuracy compared to other validated prognostic scoring systems (C-index, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.63--0.73, and calibration slope, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.68--1.32). CONCLUSION: A large, prospective, surgical series of patients with symptomatic spinal metastases was used to create a validated risk calculator that can help clinicians to inform patients about the most appropriate treatment plan. The calculator is available at www.spinemet.com.

Loss of Local Tumor Control After Index Surgery for Spinal Metastases: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: As survival after treatment for symptomatic spinal metastases increases, the incidence of local tumor recurrence also may increase. However, data regarding incidence and timing of recurrence or duration of survival after second surgeries are not readily available and may help to inform clinicians when to perform second surgeries. OBJECTIVE: To identify features associated with loss of local control (LLC) at a previously treated or new spinal level. METHODS: Clinical and surgical data were collected from a prospective cohort of 1421 patients who had surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases. Patients undergoing repeat spinal surgery for symptomatic LLC at the same or a different level were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 3.0% patients underwent repeat surgery for symptomatic LLC after a median interval of 184 days from the first surgery; median survival was 6.1 months after second surgery. Factors associated with second surgery for LLC were the primary tumor type, number of spinal levels, Tomita staging, Tokuhashi and Karnofsky scores, anterior surgical approach, more aggressive surgical resection, and postoperative radiotherapy. In total, 1.5% patients were admitted for surgery for a different spinal level than the index operation after median 338 days from the first operation. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood for repeat surgery due to LLC cannot be accurately predicted at the time of initial presentation. Factors associated with second surgery for LLC relate to less aggressive tumor biology and better survival. Most patients had a reasonable duration of survival after second surgery.

Characteristics of Patients Who Survived < 3 Months or > 2 Years After Surgery for Spinal Metastases: Can We Avoid Inappropriate Patient Selection?

PURPOSE: Survival after metastatic cancer has improved at the cost of increased presentation with metastatic spinal disease. For patients with pathologic spinal fractures and/or spinal cord compression, surgical intervention may relieve pain and improve quality of life. Surgery is generally considered to be inappropriate if anticipated survival is < 3 months. The aim of this international multicenter study was to analyze data from patients who died within 3 months or 2 years after surgery, to identify preoperative factors associated with poor or good survival, and to avoid inappropriate selection of patients for surgery in the future. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,266 patients underwent surgery for impending pathologic fractures and/or neurologic deficits and were prospectively observed. Data collected included tumor characteristics, preoperative fitness (American Society of Anesthesiologists advisory [ASA]), neurologic status (Frankel scale), performance (Karnofsky performance score [KPS]), and quality of life (EuroQol five-dimensions questionnaire [EQ-5D]). Outcomes were survival at 3 months and 2 years postsurgery. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to find preoperative factors associated with short-term and long-term survival. RESULTS: In univariable analysis, age, emergency surgery, KPS, EQ-5D, ASA, Frankel, and Tokuhashi/Tomita scores were significantly associated with short survival. In multivariable analysis, KPS and age were significantly associated with short survival (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.62; and OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.27, respectively). Associated with longer survival in univariable analysis were age, number of levels included in surgery, KPS, EQ-5D, Frankel, and Tokuhashi/Tomita scores. In multivariable analysis, the number of levels included in surgery (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.38) and primary tumor type were significantly associated with longer survival. CONCLUSION: Poor performance status at presentation is the strongest indicator of poor short-term survival, whereas low disease load and favorable tumor histology are associated with longer-term survival.

Rapid improvements in pain and quality of life are sustained after surgery for spinal metastases in a large prospective cohort.

Introduction Metastatic spinal cancer is a common condition that may lead to spinal instability, pain and paralysis. In the 1980s, surgery was discouraged because results showed worse neurological outcomes and pain compared with radiotherapy alone. However, with the advent of modern imaging and spinal stabilisation techniques, the role of surgery has regained centre stage, though few studies have assessed quality of life and functional outcomes after surgery. Objective We investigated whether surgery provides sustained improvement in quality of life and pain relief for patients with symptomatic spinal metastases by analysing the largest reported surgical series of patients with epidural spinal metastases. Methods A prospective cohort study of 922 consecutive patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery, from the Global Spine Tumour Study Group database. Pre- and post-operative EQ-5D quality of life, visual analogue pain score, Karnofsky physical functioning score, complication rates and survival were recorded. Results Quality of life (EQ-5D), VAS pain score and Karnofsky physical functioning score improved rapidly after surgery and these improvements were sustained in those patients who survived up to 2 years after surgery. In specialised spine centres, the technical intra-operative complication rate of surgery was low, however almost a quarter of patients experienced post-operative systemic adverse events. Conclusion Surgical treatment for spinal metastases produces rapid pain relief, maintains ambulation and improves good quality of life. However, as a group, patients with cancer are vulnerable to post-operative systemic complications, hence the importance of appropriate patient selection.

Evolution of transoral surgery: three decades of change in patients, pathologies, and indications.

BACKGROUND: Transoral surgery may be used to approach pathologies at the craniocervical junction. However, the need for this approach has decreased over the past few decades. OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcome and complications of transoral surgery and extended transoral approaches at a single UK center between 1980 and 2011. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 495 ventral midline operations (between 1980 and 2004) and prospective review of 38 operations (2004-2011) in a total of 479 patients. Trends in surgery and factors associated with good or bad outcome were assessed over this 30-year period. RESULTS: Of 533 operations, the most frequently performed surgeries were simple transoral surgery (321 operations), transoral surgery with splitting of the palate (107 operations), open-door maxillotomy (58 operations), and mandibulotomy (11 operations). Since the 1990s, there has been a steady decrease in the number of operations performed, mainly due to the decrease in the number of patients with rheumatoid arthritis presenting for surgery. The incidence of craniocervical junction tumors remained constant. The number of complications was significantly associated with the preoperative neurological status, and more complications were seen in myelopathic rheumatoid patients as well as a greater trend in congenital basilar invagination. The rates of pharyngeal infection (0.6%) and cerebrospinal fluid leak (0.3%) for standard transoral surgery were extremely low. CONCLUSION: The number of transoral and associated operations has decreased over time. Transoral surgery is now mainly indicated for ventral midline tumors such as chordomas. Transnasal endoscopic techniques show promise, but a major advantage of standard transoral surgery is the low cerebrospinal fluid leak and infection rates.

C1-C2 posterior fixation: are 4 screws better than 2?

BACKGROUND: Several types of C1-C2 fixation techniques have been described over the years in order to treat atlantoaxial instability. OBJECTIVE: To compare the pros and cons of the most popular C1-C2 posterior fixation used today: C1 lateral mass-C2 pedicle screw and rods (Harms) and transarticular screw (Magerl) fixations. METHODS: Retrospective review of 122 patients who underwent Harms or Magerl fixation for atlantoaxial instability. Surgical, clinical, and radiological outcomes were compared in the 2 groups. RESULTS: 123 operations were performed, of which 47 were by the Harms technique (group H) and 76 by the Magerl technique (group M). No significant differences were found in duration of surgery, blood loss, postoperative pain, and length of hospitalization. Postoperatively, neck pain, C2-radiculopathy, and hand function improved in both groups, with better, but not statistically significant, results for group H. The intraoperative complication rate was 2.1% in group H and 21% in group M (P < .05); postoperative complication rate was 10.6% in group H and 21% in group M (P > .05). The major complications were vertebral artery injury (2.1% in group H, 13.1% in group M, P = .05) and screw fracture (2.1% in group H, 9.2% in group M, P > .05). Fusion rate at the end of follow-up was not significantly higher in group H. C1-C2 range of movements in flexion/extension at the end of follow-up was lower in group H (P = .017). CONCLUSION: Magerl with posterior wiring and Harms techniques are both effective options for stabilizing the atlantoaxial complex. However, the Harms technique appears to be safer, to have fewer complications, and to demonstrate a more robust long-term fixation.