Spine and Non-spine Bone Metastases - Current Controversies and Future Direction.

Bone is a common site of metastases in advanced cancers. The main symptom is pain, which increases morbidity and reduces quality of life. The treatment of bone metastases needs a multidisciplinary approach, with the main aim of relieving pain and improving quality of life. Apart from systemic anticancer therapy (hormonal therapy, chemotherapy or immunotherapy), there are several therapeutic options available to achieve palliation, including analgesics, surgery, local radiotherapy, bone-seeking radioisotopes and bone-modifying agents. Long-term use of non-steroidal analgesics and opiates is associated with significant side-effects, and tachyphylaxis. Radiotherapy is effective mainly in localised disease sites. Bone-targeting radionuclides are useful in patients with multiple metastatic lesions. Bone-modifying agents are beneficial in reducing skeletal-related events. This overview focuses on the role of surgery, including minimally invasive treatments, conventional radiotherapy in spinal and non-spinal bone metastases, bone-targeting radionuclides and bone-modifying agents in achieving palliation. We present the clinical data and their associated toxicity. Recent advances are also discussed.

Are soft tissue measurements on lateral cervical spine X-rays reliable in the assessment of traumatic injuries?

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic neck pain is a common presentation to the emergency department. Lateral plain radiographs remain the primary investigation in the assessment of these injuries. Soft tissue assessment forms an integral component of these radiographs. They can provide information on subtle injuries that may not be obvious. Many methods are used to assess the prevertebral soft tissue shadows. The two more commonly used techniques include the 'seven at two and two at seven' rule (method 1) and the ratio of the soft tissues with respect to the vertebral width (method 2). AIM: To assess which of the above two methods in assessing cervical spine soft tissue shadows on lateral radiographs is more sensitive in the presence of cervical spine injuries. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of consecutive traumatic cervical spine films performed within a busy trauma tertiary centre over a period of 7 months. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1-fractures; group 2-no fractures. The prevertebral soft tissue shadows were measured at referenced points on the lateral cervical spine films with respect to the above two methods and comparisons between the groups were made. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients in group 1 were compared to a control group of 60 patients in group 2. Both methods failed to identify any significant differences between the two groups. The sensitivity and specificity for method 1 was 7.6 and 93 %, and for method 2, they were 7.6 and 98 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between the soft tissue shadows when comparing patients with and without cervical spine fractures on lateral radiographs. Both commonly used measures of soft tissue shadows in clinical practice are insensitive in identifying patients with significant osseous injuries. They, therefore, do not offer any further value in interpreting traumatic cervical spine radiographs. The management of patients with cervical spine trauma in the absence of obvious osseous injury on standard radiographs should warrant a computed tomography (CT) scan if clinically indicated.

The value of radiographs obtained during forced traction under general anaesthesia in predicting flexibility in idiopathic scoliosis with Cobb angles exceeding 60 degree.

Our aim in this prospective radiological study was to determine whether the flexibility rate calculated from radiographs obtained during forced traction under general anaesthesia, was better than that of fulcrum-bending radiographs before corrective surgery in predicting the extent of the available correction in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. We evaluated 33 patients with a Cobb angle > 60 degrees on a standing posteroanterior radiograph, who had been treated by posterior correction. Pre-operative standing fulcrum-bending radiographs and those with forced-traction under general anaesthesia were obtained. Post-operative standing radiographs were taken after surgical correction. The mean forced-traction flexibility rate was 55% (SD 11.3) which was significantly higher than the mean fulcrum-bending flexibility rate of 32% (SD 16.1) (p < 0.001). We found no correlation between either the forced-traction or fulcrum-bending flexibility rates and the correction rate post-operatively (p = 0.24 and p = 0.44, respectively). Radiographs obtained during forced traction under general anaesthesia were better at predicting the flexibility of the curve than fulcrum-bending radiographs in curves with a Cobb angle > 60 degrees in the standing position and may identify those patients for whom supplementary anterior surgery can be avoided.

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment of chronic low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.

We performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to investigate the effectiveness of surgical fusion for the treatment of chronic low back pain compared to non-surgical intervention. Several electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Science Citation Index) were searched from 1966 to 2005. The meta-analysis comparison was based on the mean difference in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) change from baseline to the specified follow-up of patients undergoing surgical versus non-surgical treatment. Of the 58 articles identified, three studies were eligible for primary analysis and one study for sensitivity analysis, with a total of 634 patients. The pooled mean difference in ODI between the surgical and non-surgical groups was in favour of surgery (mean difference of ODI: 4.13, 95%CI: -0.82 to 9.08, p = 0.10, I(2) = 44.4%). Surgical treatment was associated with a 16% pooled rate of early complication (95%CI: 12-20, I(2) = 0%). Surgical fusion for chronic low back pain favoured a marginal improvement in the ODI compared to non-surgical intervention. This difference in ODI was not statistically significant and is of minimal clinical importance. Surgery was found to be associated with a significant risk of complications. Therefore, the cumulative evidence at the present time does not support routine surgical fusion for the treatment of chronic low back pain.