RESUMO
Background: The incidence of subaxial spinal metastases increases due to longer life expectancy resulting from successful modern cancer treatments. The three most utilized approaches for surgical treatment include the anterior, posterior, and combined approaches. However, despite increasing surgical volume, data on the postoperative complication profiles of different operative approaches for this patient population is scarce. Methods: The institutional databases of two large referral centers in Thailand were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with subaxial cervical spine metastasis who underwent cervical surgery during 2005 to 2015 were identified and enrolled. Clinical presentations, baseline characteristics, operative approach, perioperative complications, and postoperative outcomes, including pain, neurological recovery, and survival, were compared among the three surgical approaches. Results: The 70 patients (44 with anterior approach, 14 with posterior approach, 12 with combined approach) were enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative characteristics, including Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), Tomita score, and Revised Tokuhashi score, among the three groups. There were no significant differences among groups for medical complications, surgical complications, neurological recovery, verbal pain score improvement, survival time, or ambulatory status improvement. However, the combined approach did show a significantly higher rate of overall perioperative complications (p = 0.01), intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001), and operative time (p < 0.001) compared to the other two approaches. Conclusions: Patients in the combined approach group had the highest rates of perioperative complications. However, although the differences were not statistically significant, patients in the combined group tended to have better clinical outcomes after follow-up and the longest survival time.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ultrasound-guided proximal intercostal block (PICB) is performed at the proximal intercostal space (ICS) between the internal intercostal membrane (IIM) and the endothoracic fascia/parietal pleura (EFPP) complex. Injectate spread may follow several routes and allow for multilevel trunk analgesia. The goal of this study was to examine the anatomical spread of large-volume PICB injections and its relevance to breast surgery analgesia. METHODS: Fifteen two-level PICBs were performed in ten soft-embalmed cadavers. Radiographic contrast mixed with methylene blue was injected at the 2nd(15 ml) and 4th(25 ml) ICS, respectively. Fluoroscopy and dissection were performed to examine the injectate spread. Additionally, the medical records of 12 patients who had PICB for breast surgery were reviewed for documented dermatomal levels of clinical hypoesthesia. The records of twelve matched patients who had the same operations without PICB were reviewed to compare analgesia and opioid consumption. RESULTS: Median contrast/dye spread was 4 (2-8) and 3 (2-5) vertebral segments by fluoroscopy and dissection respectively. Dissection revealed injectate spread to the adjacent paravertebral space, T3 (60%) and T5 (27%), and cranio-caudal spread along the endothoracic fascia (80%). Clinically, the median documented area of hypoesthesia was 5 (4-7) dermatomes with 100 and 92% of the injections covering adjacent T3 and T5 dermatomes, respectively. The patients with PICB had significantly lower perioperative opioid consumption and trend towards lower pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this anatomical study, PICB at the 2nd and 4th ICS produced lateral spread along the corresponding intercostal space, medial spread to the adjacent paravertebral/epidural space and cranio-caudal spread along the endothoracic fascial plane. Clinically, combined PICBs at the same levels resulted in consistent segmental chest wall analgesia and reduction in perioperative opioid consumption after breast surgery. The incomplete overlap between paravertebral spread in the anatomical study and area of hypoesthesia in our clinical findings, suggests that additional non-paravertebral routes of injectate distribution, such as the endothoracic fascial plane, may play important clinical role in the multi-level coverage provided by this block technique.
