The Effect of Perioperative Radiation Therapy on Spinal Bone Fusion Following Spine Tumor Surgery

Earlier Radiation Is Associated with Improved 1-Year Survival After Metastatic Spine Tumor Surgery

OBJECTIVE

In patients undergoing metastatic spine surgery, we sought to 1) report time to postoperative radiation therapy (RT), 2) describe the predictive factors of time to postoperative RT, and 3) determine if earlier postoperative RT is associated with improved local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study was undertaken of all patients undergoing spine surgery for extradural metastatic disease and receiving RT within 3 months postoperatively between January 2010 and January 2021. Time to postoperative RT was dichotomized at <1 month versus 1-3 months. The primary outcomes were LR, OS, and 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes were wound complication, Karnofsky Performance Status, and modified McCormick Scale (MMS) score. Regression analyses controlled for age, body mass index, tumor size, preoperative RT, preoperative/postoperative chemotherapy, and type of RT.

RESULTS

Of 76 patients undergoing spinal metastasis surgery and receiving postoperative RT within 3 months, 34 (44.7%) received RT within 1 month and 42 (55.2%) within 1-3 months. Patients with larger tumor size (β = -3.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.59 to -0.57; P = 0.021) or new neurologic deficits (β = -16.21; 95% CI, -32.21 to -0.210; P = 0.047) had a shorter time to RT. No significant association was found between time to RT and LR or OS on multivariable logistic/Cox regression. However, patients who received RT between 1 and 3 months had a lower odds of 1-year survival compared with those receiving RT within 1 month (odds ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.74; P = 0.022). Receiving RT within 1 month versus 1-3 months was not associated with wound complications (7.1% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.556) (odds ratio, 4.40; 95% CI, 0.40-118.0; P = 0.266) or Karnofsky Performance Status/modified McCormick Scale score.

CONCLUSIONS

Spine surgeons, oncologists, and radiation oncologists should make every effort to start RT within 1 month to improve 1-year survival after metastatic spine tumor surgery.

Intramedullary spinal cord metastasis treated with prophylactic laminoplasty prior to radiation to the spinal cord: a case report

Background

A cervical laminoplasty is a surgical procedure used to treat moderate-to-severe cervical stenosis resulting in cervical myelopathy. It is performed to widen the spinal canal and reduce compression on the spinal cord and surrounding nerves. Though often performed electively on patients presenting with varying degrees of neurologic dysfunction including weakness and imbalance, it may also be used prophylactically when spinal cord inflammation or edema is anticipated. Radiotherapy in the spinal cord is known to produce radiation-induced damage leading to radiation myelopathy.

Case Description

We present the case of a 62-year-old male diagnosed with both cervical stenosis and an intramedullary cervical spinal cord metastatic tumor. This patient presented with significant symptoms including limited mobility, numbness, lower back pain, paresthesia, and spasms in both legs as well as worsening sexual function. Given that the patient was to undergo radiotherapy, a cervical laminoplasty was performed to eliminate ongoing spinal cord compression as well to prevent future neurologic decline resulting from post-radiation inflammation and edema.

Conclusions

This case highlights that cervical laminoplasty can be performed safely and effectively with significant improvement in patients with metastatic disease. By treating the underlying symptomatic stenosis, and protect the patient from the potential for spinal cord edema from radiation to a spinal cord lesion in an already narrow spinal canal.

Unplanned Readmission After Surgery for Cervical Spine Metastases

OBJECTIVE

Patients undergoing surgery for cervical spine metastases are at risk for unplanned readmission due to comorbidities and chemotherapy/radiation. Our objectives were to: 1) report the incidence of unplanned readmission, 2) identify risk factors associated with unplanned readmission, and 3) determine the impact of an unplanned readmission on long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective, case-control study was undertaken of patients undergoing cervical spine surgery for metastatic disease between 02/2010 and 01/2021. The primary outcome of interest was unplanned readmission within 6 months. Survival analysis was performed for overall survival (OS) and local recurrence (LR).

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients underwent cervical spine surgery for metastatic disease with the following approaches: 11 (18.0%) anterior, 28 (45.9%) posterior, and 22 (36.1%) combined. Mean age was 60.9 ± 11.2 years and 38 (62.3%) were males. A total of 9/61 (14.8%) patients had an unplanned readmission, 3 for surgical reasons and 6 for medical reasons. No difference was found in demographics, preoperative Karnofsky Performance Scale (P = 0.992), motor strength (P = 0.477), or comorbidities (P = 0.213) between readmitted patients versus not. Readmitted patients had a higher rate of preoperative radiation (P = 0.009). No statistical differences were found in operative time (P = 0.893), estimated blood loss (P = 0.676), length of stay (P = 0.720), discharge disposition (P = 0.279), and operative approach (P = 0.450). Furthermore, no difference was found regarding complications (P = 0.463), postoperative Karnofsky Performance Scale (P = 0.535), and postoperative Modified McCormick Scale (P = 0.586). Lastly, unplanned readmissions were not associated with OS (log-rank; P = 0.094) or LR (log-rank; P = 0.110).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing cervical spine metastasis surgery, readmission occurred in 15% of patients, 33% for surgical reasons, and 67% for medical reasons. Preoperative radiotherapy was associated with an increased rate of unplanned readmissions, yet readmission had no association with OS or LR.

Focused versus conventional radiotherapy in spinal oncology: is there any difference in fusion rates and pseudoarthrosis?

INTRODUCTION

Radiotherapy is considered standard of care for adjuvant peri-operative treatment of many spinal tumors, including those with instrumented fusion. Unfortunately, radiation treatment has been linked to increased risk of pseudoarthrosis. Newer focused radiotherapy strategies with enhanced conformality could offer improved fusion rates for these patients, but this has not been confirmed.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients at three tertiary care academic institutions with primary and secondary spinal malignancies that underwent resection, instrumented fusion, and peri-operative radiotherapy. Two board certified neuro-radiologists used the Lenke fusion score to grade fusion status at 6 and 12-months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included clinical pseudoarthrosis, wound complications, the effect of radiation timing and radiobiological dose delivered, the use of photons versus protons, tumor type, tumor location, and use of autograft on fusion outcomes.

RESULTS

After review of 1252 spinal tumor patients, there were 60 patients with at least 6 months follow-up that were included in our analyses. Twenty-five of these patients received focused radiotherapy, 20 patients received conventional radiotherapy, and 15 patients were treated with protons. There was no significant difference between the groups for covariates such as smoking status, obesity, diabetes, intraoperative use of autograft, and use of peri-operative chemotherapy. There was a significantly higher rate of fusion for patients treated with focused radiotherapy compared to those treated with conventional radiotherapy at 6-months (64.0% versus 30.0%, Odds ratio: 4.15, p = 0.036) and 12-months (80.0% versus 42.1%, OR: 5.50, p = 0.022). There was a significantly higher rate of clinical pseudoarthrosis in the conventional radiotherapy cohort compared to patients in the focused radiotherapy cohort (19.1% versus 0%, p = 0.037). There was no difference in fusion outcomes for any of the secondary outcomes except for use of autograft. The use of intra-operative autograft was associated with an improved fusion at 12-months (66.7% versus 37.5%, OR: 3.33, p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

Focused radiotherapy may be associated with an improved rate of fusion and clinical pseudoarthrosis when compared to conventional radiation delivery strategies in patients with spinal tumors. Use of autograft at the time of surgery may be associated with improved 12-month fusion rates. Further large-scale prospective and randomized controlled studies are needed to better stratify the effects of radiation delivery modality in these patients.

Vascularized Rib Bone Grafting: Indications, Techniques, and Clinical Outcomes

Pseudarthrosis is a difficult complication often seen in patients with complex spinal pathology. To supplement existing neurosurgical approaches to cervicothoracic spinal instrumentation and fusion, novel vascularized rib bone grafts can be utilized in patients at high risk for failed spinal fusion. In this article, we discuss the indications, benefits, surgical technique, feasibility, and limitations of using rib vascularized rib bone grafts to augment spinal fusion.

Posterior vertebral column resection as a safe procedure leading to solid bone fusion in metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

OBJECTIVE

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death and greatly decreases a patient's quality of life. Vertebral metastases often lead to epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC) requiring surgical therapy. It has previously been shown that in patients with metastatic ESCC (MESCC), a surgical intervention leads to an improved outcome. Although the treatment paradigms in spinal metastases have changed and separation surgery followed by stereotactic radiosurgery is considered the best strategy, there are still cases in which 360° decompression with stabilization is indicated. In these patients, a proper bone fusion should be the treatment goal to guarantee good clinical results in extended survival times through progressions in oncological therapies. The aim of this study was to examine the safety and feasibility of posterior vertebral column resection (pVCR) in everyday clinical practice, achievement of bone fusion, and midterm outcome in patients with MESCC.

METHODS

All patients treated with pVCR due to MESCC between 2013 and 2020 were enrolled in this observational single-center study. Demographics, outcome parameters, numeric rating scale (NRS) score, Frankel grade, and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score were evaluated. Radiological images routinely acquired during follow-up were reviewed and screened for the presence of bone fusion.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were treated by eight surgeons. The mean follow-up period was 549 ± 739 days. At baseline, the average age was 64.4 ± 10.9 years. Reported NRS scores (preoperative 6.2 ± 1.7 vs postoperative 3.4 ± 1.6) and segmental kyphosis as measured on sagittal CT images (preoperative 13.5° ± 8.6° vs postoperative 3.8° ± 5.4°) decreased significantly (p < 0.001). In only 2 patients (3%), the Frankel grade worsened postoperatively, whereas in 12 patients (18.2%) an improvement was documented. The KPS score remained constant during the observation period (preoperative 73.2% ± 18.2% vs 78.3% ± 18% at last follow-up). Bone fusion was observed in 26 patients (86.7%) receiving CT more than 100 days after the index surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

pVCR is a reliable surgical technique in daily clinical practice, which proves to be beneficial in terms of short- as well as midterm outcome, as judged by the KPS and NRS. The overall improvement in the Frankel grade shows patient safety. A bone fusion was observed regularly in oncological patients undergoing pVCR. The authors therefore conclude that pVCR is a safe, fast, and efficient strategy to achieve stability and pain relief by achievement of bone fusion in cancer patients.

Factors Related to Instrumentation Failure in Titanium Mesh Reconstruction for Thoracic and Lumbar Tumors: Retrospective Analysis of 178 Patients

Purpose

To investigate risk factors for instrumentation failure (IF) in titanium (Ti) mesh reconstruction for thoracic and lumbar tumors.

Patients and Methods

The clinical data of patients with thoracic or lumbar tumors who received Ti mesh reconstruction via the posterior approach in our hospital from 2013 to 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The observation indexes included sex, age, BMI, the vertebra resection mode, the number of resected vertebral segments, application of bone cement, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, revision or primary surgery, and primary tumor metastasis. Correlations between these factors and IF were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier survival and logistics regression analyses.

Results

The 178 patients included 108 males and 70 females with a mean age of 48.09±16.21 (6–78) years and a mean follow-up period of 51.18 (24–90) months. The data showed that 17 patients (9.55%) were inflicted with IF, involving the thoracic vertebra in 11 cases, thoracolumbar vertebrae (T12–L1) in 2 cases, and lumbar vertebrae in 4 cases. The mean interval between surgery to IF was 35.18±14.17 (14–59) months. Univariate analysis showed that total vertebral body resection, the number of resected vertebral segments, radiotherapy and multiple tumor resection were potential factors for IF, while multivariate analysis showed that only total vertebral body resection, the number of resected vertebral segments and radiotherapy were independent factors.

Conclusion

Total vertebra resection, the number of resected vertebral segments (≥2) and radiotherapy before and after operation were significant risk factors related to IF.

An Overview of Decision Making in the Management of Metastatic Spinal Tumors

INTRODUCTION

Spinal metastases are the most commonly encountered spinal tumors. With increasing life expectancy and better systemic treatment options, the incidence of patients seeking treatment for spinal metastasis is rising. Radical resections and conventional low-dose radiotherapy have given way to modern 'separation' surgeries and stereotactic body radiotherapy which entails lesser morbidity and improved local control. This article provides an overview of the decision making and currently available treatment options for metastatic spinal tumors.

METHODS

A MEDLINE literature search was made for studies in English language reporting on human subjects, describing results of various treatment options that are a part of multidisciplinary management of metastatic spinal tumors. The highest-quality evidence available in the literature was reviewed.

DISCUSSION

Treatment of patients with metastatic spinal tumors is largely palliative, with radiotherapy and selective surgery being the mainstays of management. Multidisciplinary management that incorporates factors like patient performance status, expected survival and systemic burden of disease and employs well-validated decision-making frameworks for guiding treatment holds the key to an effective palliative treatment strategy. Effective pain management, achieving local control, adequate neurological decompression in the setting of epidural cord compression and surgical stabilization for mechanical stabilization are the main goals of treatment.

CONCLUSION

The management of metastatic spinal tumors has been rapidly evolving; currently, limited decompression and stabilization followed by postoperative SBRT for local tumor control are associated with less morbidity and may be referred to as the current standard of care in these patients.

Survival, fusion, and hardware failure after surgery for spinal metastatic disease

OBJECTIVE

Decompression with instrumented fusion is commonly employed for spinal metastatic disease. Arthrodesis is typically sought despite limited knowledge of fusion outcomes, high procedural morbidity, and poor prognosis. This study aimed to describe survival, fusion, and hardware failure after decompression and fusion for spinal metastatic disease.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively examined a prospectively collected, single-institution database of adult patients undergoing decompression and instrumented fusion for spinal metastases. Patients were followed clinically until death or loss to follow-up. Fusion was assessed using CT when performed for oncological surveillance at 6-month intervals through 24 months postoperatively. Estimated cumulative incidences for fusion and hardware failure accounted for the competing risk of death. Potential risk factors were analyzed with univariate Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-four patients were identified. The mean age ± SD was 62.2 ± 10.8 years, 61.6% of patients were male, 98.8% received allograft and/or autograft, and 89.6% received postoperative radiotherapy. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median survival was 11.0 months (IQR 3.5-37.8 months). The estimated cumulative incidences of any fusion and of complete fusion were 28.8% (95% CI 21.3%-36.7%) and 8.2% (95% CI 4.1%-13.9%). Of patients surviving 6 and 12 months, complete fusion was observed in 12.5% and 16.1%, respectively. The estimated cumulative incidence of hardware failure was 4.2% (95% CI 1.5-9.3%). Increasing age predicted hardware failure (HR 1.2, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Low rates of complete fusion and hardware failure were observed due to the high competing risk of death. Further prospective, case-control studies incorporating nonfusion instrumentation techniques may be warranted.

Low Implant Failure Rate of Percutaneous Fixation for Spinal Metastases: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate incidence and types of implant failure observed in a series of patients with spinal metastases (SM) treated with minimally invasive stabilization surgery without fusion.

METHODS

In this multicenter, retrospective, observational study, we reviewed the files of patients >18 years old who underwent surgery for SM using percutaneous spinal stabilization without fusion with a minimum 3-month follow-up. The following variables were included: demographics, clinical findings, prior radiation history, SM location, epidural spinal cord compression scale, Spinal Instability Neoplastic Scale, neurological examination, and surgery-related data. Primary outcome measure was implant failure rate, as observed in patients' last computed tomography scan. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify baseline factors and factors associated with implant failure.

RESULTS

Analysis included 72 patients. Mean age of patients was 62 years, 39 patients were men, and 75% of patients had an intermediate Spinal Instability Neoplastic Scale score. Tumor separation surgery was performed in 48.6% of patients. Short instrumentation was indicated in 54.2% of patients. Three patients (4.2%) experienced implant failure (2 screw loosening, 1 screw cut-out); none of them required revision surgery. In 73.6% of cases, survival was >6 months. No significant predictors of failure were identified in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A low implant failure rate was observed over the short and medium term, even when short instrumentations without fusion were performed. These findings suggest that minimally invasive stabilization surgery without fusion may be an effective and safe way to treat complicated SM.

Importance of Spinal Alignment in Primary and Metastatic Spine Tumors

Spinal alignment, particularly with respect to spinopelvic parameters, is highly correlated with morbidity and health-related quality-of-life outcomes. Although the importance of spinal alignment has been emphasized in the deformity literature, spinopelvic parameters have not been considered in the context of spine oncology. Because the aim of oncologic spine surgery is mostly palliative, consideration of spinopelvic parameters could improve postoperative outcomes in both the primary and metastatic tumor population by taking overall vertebral stability into account. This review highlights the relevance of focal and global spinal alignment, particularly related to spinopelvic parameters, in the treatment of spine tumors.

Multidisciplinary surgical planning for en bloc resection of malignant primary cervical spine tumors involving 3D-printed models and neoadjuvant therapies: report of 2 cases

Effective en bloc resection of primary spinal tumors necessitates careful consideration of adjacent anatomical structures in order to achieve negative margins and reduce surgical morbidity. This can be particularly challenging in the cervical spine, where vital neurovascular and connective tissues are present in the region. Early multidisciplinary surgical planning that includes clinicians and engineers can both optimize surgical planning and enable a more feasible resection with oncological margins. The aim of the current work was to demonstrate two cases that involved multidisciplinary surgical planning for en bloc resection of primary cervical spine tumors, successfully utilizing 3D-printed patient models and neoadjuvant therapies.

Instrumented Spinal Stabilization without Fusion for Spinal Metastatic Disease

OBJECTIVES

Spinal stabilization surgery is an integral part of the treatment of spinal metastatic disease. Bony fusion is the hallmark of spinal stabilization in non-oncology patients. Spinal oncology patients are unlikely to achieve bony fusion because of their overall prognosis and concurrent therapies. Stabilization surgery without fusion may be a reasonable approach for these patients. Literature evaluating the effectiveness of this approach is limited. The object of this study was to investigate the rate of instrumentation failure in patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumented stabilization without fusion for spinal metastatic disease.

METHODS

Data from consecutive cases of spinal surgery at our institution during an 81-month period were reviewed. Demographics, clinical notes, and computed tomography findings were recorded and used to evaluate instrumentation failures. Patients who underwent separation surgery that included laminectomy and posterior spinal instrumentation without fusion for spinal metastatic disease and had follow-up computed tomography scans >3 months postoperatively were selected for the study.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were included in the study. Mean age was 64.85 ± 6.53 years. Nine patients were women. A mean of 1.61 ± 0.96 laminectomy levels was performed. A mean of 8.26 ± 1.48 screws was inserted. The mean postoperative discharge date was 5.07 ± 1.47 days. Mean follow-up duration was 12.17 ± 11.73 months. None of the patients had a change in instrumentation position, pedicle screw pullout, change in spinal alignment, or progressive deformity. No patient required reoperation or instrumentation revision or replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience suggests that instrumented spinal stabilization without fusion is an acceptable approach for patients with spinal metastatic disease.