Prognosticating outcomes and survival for patients with lumbar spinal metastases: Results of a bayesian regression analysis

Posterior-only 2-level vertebrectomy and fusion in a medically complex patient with lumbar metastasis: illustrative case

BACKGROUND

Spinal metastases are commonly seen in patients with cancer and often indicate a poor prognosis. Treatment can include curative or palliative surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. The surgical approach varies widely on the basis of the affected region of the spine, the location of the tumor (anterior versus posterior), the goal of surgery, the health of the patient, and surgeon preference.

OBSERVATIONS

The authors present a case of a 68-year-old male with intractable lower-back pain and substantially diminished ambulation. Diagnostic imaging revealed a lumbar metastasis from a cholangiocarcinoma primary at L2-3 (4.5 cm anteroposterior × 5.7 cm transverse × 7.0 cm craniocaudal). The patient underwent a 2-level vertebrectomy with expandable cage placement and T10 to S2 fusion via a posterior-only approach. The patient regained much of his mobility and quality of life after the surgery.

LESSONS

Although this was a high-risk surgery, the authors show that a posterior-only approach can be used for lumbar vertebrectomies and fusion when necessary. Palliative surgeries carrying a high risk, especially in the setting of a limited prognosis, should include multidisciplinary deliberations and a thorough discussion of the risks and outcome expectations with the patient.

Predictors for quality of life, pain and functional outcomes after surgical treatment of metastatic disease in the spine

BACKGROUND

While predictors for postoperative survival in spine tumour patients have been identified, there is limited evidence for predictors of postoperative Quality of Life (QoL), pain and functional outcome.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-three consecutive patients, who had undergone surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases between June 2016 and April 2019, were interviewed preoperatively and during follow-ups at three, six and 12 months using the EQ-5D-3L, COMI, and ODI questionnaires. Differences in means exceeding the specific Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) values were considered clinically significant.

RESULTS

Thirty-three percent of the patients were reported dead after 12 months. Only one metastasis compared to multiple metastases has 7.9 the Odds for an improved EQ-5D-3L score at three months. No neoadjuvant metastatic irradiation has 6.8 the Odds for the improvement at that time against performed radiation. A preoperative ODI score between 50.1 and 100 has 22.0 times the odds compared to the range from 0 to 50 for an improved EQ-5D-3L after three months, and 12.5 times the odds in favour of improved COMI after three months, and 13.6 times the odds for improvement of ODI at the three-month follow-up. A preoperative COMI score ranging from 5.0 to 10 has 21 times the odds of a COMI between 0 and 5 for an improved EQ-5D-3L score and 11 times the odds for an improved ODI after 12 months. Other predictors showed no statistically significant improvement.

CONCLUSION

An improvement in QoL, pain and spinal function after 12 months can be predicted by a subjective preoperative poor health condition. Impaired spinal function before surgery, a singular metastasis and no previous irradiation is predictive of improved spinal function and quality of life three months after surgery.