Karim, S. Mohammed

OBJECTIVE Spinal stereotactic radiosurgery (SSRS) is an established treatment modality for spinal metastatic disease. A common complication of SSRS is postradiation pathologic fracture. The authors evaluated the risk of pathologic fracture in sacral SSRS. METHODS All patients receiving SSRS in 1 to 5 fractions to 1 or more sacral levels between 2011 and 2020 at participating institutions were included. Demographic, histological, anatomical, and outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 28. RESULTS Of 67 total patients, 50 (74.6%) were men and 17 (25.4%) were women. The most common tumor histologies were prostate adenocarcinoma (n = 16 [23.9%]) and renal cell carcinoma (n = 12 [17.9%]). Median (range) age at treatment was 63 (8–87) years. The mean ± SD (range) number of levels treated was 1.5 ± 0.7 (1–4) levels. Mean ± SD (range) bone density at S1 was 208.0 ± 74.4 (−3.0 to 443.3) Hounsfield units (HUs). Median (range) follow-up was 16.6 (1.5–132) months, median ± SD (range) overall survival was 24 ± 21.0 (1.7–83.3) months, and the 1-year local control rate was 83.6%. Fourteen patients (20.9%) experienced fracture within the radiation field. There was no association between fracture and patient sex (p = 0.32), age (p = 0.40), S1 HU (p = 0.28), tumor location according to Denis classification (p = 0.87), presence of pain (p = 0.66), single versus multifraction radiation (p = 0.44), or number of levels treated (p = 0.52). Patients experiencing in-field progression were more likely to experience fracture (61.5% vs 10.2%, p < 0.001), and patients experiencing fracture had a higher average Spine Instability Neoplastic Score than patients without fracture (5.7 vs 4.3, p = 0.049). Only local control remained as a factor associated with sacral fracture in the multivariate analysis. Of the patients experiencing fracture, 10 (71.4%) were symptomatic and 3 of those (30.0%) underwent post-SSRS surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS Pathologic fracture may occur after sacral SSRS in a significant number of patients and is significantly associated with failure of local control.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for mechanical complications following complex spinal reconstruction for spondylectomy of primary spinal column tumors. METHODS A retrospective chart review identified patients treated with spondylectomy for primary spinal column tumors in the thoracic or lumbar spine followed by posterior instrumentation and anterior column reconstruction. Variables collected included basic demographics, smoking status, chronic steroid use, frailty (Charlson Comorbidity Index), extent of resection, Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini classification, tumor volume, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score, anterior column reconstruction and fixation techniques, rod characteristics, Hounsfield units (HUs), and neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemoradiation. RESULTS Twenty-five patients were included (14 men, 11 women) with an average (± SD) age of 45 ± 18 years, BMI of 28 ± 5.7, and follow-up of 6.0 ± 6.2 years. Primary spinal column tumor pathology included chordoma (40%), chondrosarcoma (16%), giant cell tumor (16%), osteosarcoma (16%), osteoblastoma (8%), and aneurysmal bone cyst (4%). Six patients (24%) experienced mechanical complications, including rod fractures (n = 5) and distal junctional failure (n = 1). Of the 6 patients with mechanical complications, 4 (67%) underwent reoperation. The length of follow-up was the only statistically significant risk factor for patients with mechanical complications (average 11 years) compared to those without complications (average 4.4 years, p = 0.047). Average HUs were 144 for mechanical complication patients versus 180 for those without (p = 0.08). Anterior column reconstruction materials included a titanium cage (13 patients, 3 failures), structural allograft (6 patients, 2 failures), vascularized fibular strut autograft (6 patients, no failures), nonvascularized structural autograft (5 patients, 1 failure), vascularized rib autograft (5 patients, 2 failures), and a polyetheretherketone cage (2 patients, no failures). The vascularized fibular strut autograft had a 0% mechanical failure rate, but this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.28). Twelve patients (48%) had anterior fixation placed, with a 17% rate of mechanical complications (p = 0.65). Five patients (20%) had > 2-rod constructs, with a 20% mechanical complication rate (p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS Reconstruction following primary spinal column tumor resection is a significant challenge, as evident by a high rate of mechanical complications and instrumentation failure. Future studies are needed with larger sample sizes to identify techniques that may mitigate the risk of failure.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine independent risk factors for vertebral compression fracture (VCF) following stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in metastatic spine disease. METHODS Patients treated with SBRT for spinal metastasis at a single tertiary care center between 2008 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Patients with CT scans obtained within 1 year of SBRT completion were included. Variables collected included demographics, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS), primary tumor pathology, Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini (WBB) classification, chemoradiation treatment details, and bone quality as assessed by Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT. HUs were measured for the medullary bone of the metastatic level, the tumor, and the vertebral bodies cephalad and caudal to the metastasis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of post-SBRT pathological fracture. RESULTS A total of 292 patients (mean age 66 years) with 392 unique lesions were included. The most common pathologies were prostate (n = 193), kidney/renal cell (n = 46), and lung (n = 33). The most common tumor levels were thoracic (n = 206 lesions) and lumbar (n = 128 lesions). SBRT was generally delivered in 1–3 fractions with doses ranging from 16 to 24 Gy in 1 fraction and 24–36 Gy in 3 fractions. Of the 392 lesions, 73 suffered VCF: 21 (29%) with < 25% height loss, 15 (21%) with 25%–40% height loss, and 37 (51%) with > 40% height loss. On univariate analysis, patients with VCF had lower average HUs (156 ± 52 vs 202 ± 89, p < 0.001), more WBB sectors involved (3 ± 2 vs 3 ± 1, p < 0.001), higher SINSs (8 ± 3 vs 6 ± 2, p < 0.001), were more commonly female (33% vs 22%, p = 0.05), and more commonly had nonprostate pathology (67% vs 47%, p = 0.003). VCF rates were similar between moderate (< 20 Gy in 1 fraction, < 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) and high-dose (> 20 Gy in 1 fraction, > 30 Gy in 3 or 5 fractions) radiation schema (15% VCF vs 16% no VCF, respectively; p = 0.99). On multivariable logistic regression, independently significant predictors of VCF were HUs ≤ 229 (OR 6, p < 0.001), affected levels ≥ 3 WBB segments (OR 3, p < 0.001), and an SINS ≥ 8 (OR 2, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Low pre-radiation HUs, involvement of more WBB sectors, and a higher SINS were independent predictors of VCF following SBRT for metastatic spine disease.

Study Design Survey study. Objectives The purpose of this study was to characterize the utility of 3D printed patient specific anatomic models for the planning of complex primary spine tumor surgeries. Methods A survey of individual members of an international study group of spinal oncology surgeons was performed. Participants were provided a clinical vignette, pathologic diagnosis, and pre-operative imaging for three primary spinal oncology cases. Study participants provided a free text surgical plan for resection and were then presented an associated 3D printed model for each case and asked to re-evaluate their surgical plan. Results Ten spinal oncology surgeons participated in the study, representing nine institutions across five countries. Four of the surgeons (40%) made significant changes to their surgical plan after reviewing the 3D models, including sacrifice of an additional nerve root to obtain negative margins, sparing an SI joint that was originally planned for inclusion in the en bloc resection, adjusting the location of osteotomy cuts, changes to the number of surgical stages and/or staging order, and preservation of neurology that was originally planned for sacrifice. The overall impression of the 3D models was positive, with 90% of the participants stating they found the 3D model useful in developing a surgical plan. Conclusions Surgical planning for resection of primary spinal column tumors is challenging and time intensive. 3D printed patient specific surgical models may be an additional tool that can augment surgical planning and execution by improving the chance of accomplishing surgical resection goals and minimizing morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Using standard anterior approaches, consistent R0 resection of locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancer involving the deep pelvic sidewall may be unattainable. Therefore, to improve R0 resection rates, we have used a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach to resection of tumors in this location. OBJECTIVE: To assess the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes of the first 10 patients operated on using this approach. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective case series review of our prospectively maintained surgical pathology and tumor registries. SETTING: This study was conducted at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. PATIENTS: Ten patients (6 female individuals, median age 53.5 years) with primary or recurrent anal or rectal cancer treated with a posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach were identified. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were the R0 resection rate and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: An R0 resection was achieved in all 10 patients. Nine patients developed 1 or more 30-day Clavien-Dindo grade III complications. Nine patients developed gluteal wound complications ranging from superficial wound dehiscence to flap necrosis. During the follow-up period, 4 patients were found to have metastatic disease and 1 patient had local re-recurrence. LIMITATIONS: Small cohort with heterogeneous tumors and a short follow-up duration. CONCLUSION: A posterior-first, then anterior 2-stage approach has allowed us to achieve consistent R0 resection margins in locally advanced primary and recurrent rectal and anal cancers involving the deep pelvic sidewall. Poor wound healing of the posterior gluteal incision is a common complication. See Video Abstract. MEJORANDO LAS TASAS DE RESECCIÓN R0 CON UN ABORDAJE DE DOS ETAPAS PRIMERO POSTERIOR PARA LA RESECCIÓN EN BLOQUE DE CÁNCERES ANORRECTALES PRIMARIOS Y RECURRENTES LOCALMENTE AVANZADOS QUE AFECTAN LA PARED LATERAL PÉLVICA PROFUNDA ANTECEDENTES: Utilizando abordajes anteriores estándares, la resección R0 consistente del cáncer de recto y ano primario y recurrente localmente avanzado involucrando la pared lateral pélvica profunda puede ser inalcanzable. Por lo tanto, para mejorar las tasas de resección R0, hemos empleado un abordaje de 2 etapas primero posterior y luego anterior para la resección de tumores en esta ubicación. OBJETIVO: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos de los primeros 10 pacientes operados con este abordaje. DISEÑO: Realizamos una revisión retrospectiva de series de casos de nuestros registros de patología quirúrgica y tumores mantenidos prospectivamente. AJUSTE: Este estudio se realizó en la Clínica Mayo en Rochester, Minnesota, EE. UU. PACIENTES: Se identificaron diez pacientes (6 mujeres, mediana de edad 53.5 años) con cáncer anal o rectal primario o recurrente tratados con un abordaje de dos etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron la tasa de resección R0 y los resultados quirúrgicos. RESULTADOS: Se logró una resección R0 en los 10 pacientes. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron una o más complicaciones de grado III de Clavien-Dindo a los 30 días. Nueve pacientes desarrollaron complicaciones de la herida del glúteo que variaron desde dehiscencia superficial de la herida hasta necrosis del colgajo. Durante el período de seguimiento, se encontró que 4 pacientes tenían enfermedad metastásica y un paciente tuvo recurrencia local. LIMITACIONES: Cohorte pequeño con tumores heterogéneos y corta duración de seguimiento. CONCLUSIÓN: Un abordaje en 2 etapas, primero posterior y luego anterior, nos ha permitido lograr márgenes de resección R0 consistentes en cánceres de recto y anal primarios y recurrentes localmente avanzados que afectan la pared lateral pélvica profunda. La mala cicatrización de la incisión glútea posterior es una complicación común. (Traducción—Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez)

OBJECTIVE Spine metastases are commonly treated with radiotherapy for local tumor control; pathologic fracture is a potential complication of spinal radiotherapy. Both Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT and vertebral bone quality (VBQ) on MRI have been argued to predict stability as measured by odds of pathologic fracture, although it is unclear if there is a difference in the predictive power between the two methodologies. The objective of the present study was to examine whether one methodology is a better predictor of pathologic fracture following radiotherapy for mobile spine metastases. METHODS Patients who underwent radiotherapy (conventional external-beam radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiation therapy, or intensity-modulated radiation therapy) for mobile spine (C1–L5) metastases at a tertiary care center were retrospectively identified. Details regarding underlying pathology, patient demographics, and tumor morphology were collected. Vertebral involvement was assessed using the Weinstein-Boriani-Biagini (WBB) system. Bone quality of the non–tumor-involved bone was assessed on both pretreatment CT and MRI. Univariable analyses were conducted to identify independent predictors of fracture, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to identify significant predictors of time to pathologic fracture. Stepwise Cox regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of time to fracture. RESULTS One hundred patients were included (mean age 62.7 ± 11.9 years; 61% male), of whom 35 experienced postradiotherapy pathologic fractures. The most common histologies were lung (22%), prostate (21%), breast (14%), and renal cell (13%). On univariable analysis, the mean HUs of the vertebrae adjacent to the fractured vertebra were significantly lower among those experiencing fracture; VBQ was not significantly associated with fracture odds. Survival analysis showed that average HUs ≤ 132, nonprostate pathology, involvement of ≥ 3 vertebral body segments on the WBB system, Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) ≥ 7, and the presence of axial pain all predicted increased odds of fracture (all p < 0.001). Cox regression found that HUs ≤ 132 (OR 2.533, 95% CI 1.257–5.103; p = 0.009), ≥ 3 WBB vertebral body segments involved (OR 2.376, 95% CI 1.132–4.987; p = 0.022), and axial pain (OR 2.036, 95% CI 0.916–4.526; p = 0.081) predicted increased fracture odds, while prostate pathology predicted decreased odds (OR 0.076, 95% CI 0.009–0.613; p = 0.016). Sensitivity analysis suggested that an HU threshold of ≤ 132 and a SINS of ≥ 7 identified patients at increased risk of fracture. CONCLUSIONS The present results suggest that bone density surrogates as measured on CT, but not MRI, can be used to predict the risk of pathologic fracture following radiotherapy for mobile spine metastases. More extensive vertebral body involvement and the presence of mechanical axial pain additionally predict increased fracture odds.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to analyze risk factors for sacral fracture following noninstrumented partial sacral amputation for en bloc chordoma resection. METHODS A multicenter retrospective chart review identified patients who underwent noninstrumented partial sacral amputation for en bloc chordoma resection with pre- and postoperative imaging. Hounsfield units (HU) were measured in the S1 level. Sacral amputation level nomenclature was based on the highest sacral level with bone removed (e.g., S1 foramen amputation at the S1–2 vestigial disc is an S2 sacral amputation). Variables collected included basic demographics, patient comorbidities, surgical approach, preoperative radiographic details, neoadjuvant and adjuvant radiation therapy, and postoperative sacral fracture data. RESULTS A total of 101 patients (60 men, 41 women) were included; they had an average age of 69 years, BMI of 29 kg/m2, and follow-up of 60 months. The sacral amputation level was S1 (2%), S2 (37%), S3 (44%), S4 (9%), and S5 (9%). Patients had a posterior-only approach (77%) or a combined anterior–posterior approach (23%), with 10 patients (10%) having partial sacroiliac (SI) joint resection. Twenty-seven patients (27%) suffered a postoperative sacral fracture, all occurring between 1 and 7 months after the index surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated S1 or S2 sacral amputation level (p = 0.001), combined anterior–posterior approach (p = 0.0064), and low superior S1 HU (p = 0.027) to be independent predictors of sacral fracture. The fracture rate for patients with superior S1 HU < 225, 225–300, and > 300 was 38%, 15%, and 9%, respectively. An optimal superior S1 HU cutoff of 300 was found to maximize sensitivity (89%) and specificity (42%) in predicting postamputation sacral fracture. In addition, the fracture rate for patients who underwent partial SI joint resection was 100%. CONCLUSIONS Patients with S1 or S2 partial sacral amputations, a combined anterior–posterior surgical approach, low superior S1 HU, and partial SI joint resection are at higher risk for postoperative sacral fracture following en bloc chordoma resection and should be considered for spinopelvic instrumentation at the index procedure.

INTRODUCTION: Using standard anterior-only or anterior then posterior approaches can make an R0 resection difficult to achieve in patients with pelvic sidewall recurrences because of confined working spaces and poor visibility. TECHNIQUE: Given the limitations of standard approaches, we have used a novel posterior-first then anterior 2-stage approach allowing us to widely expose and secure deep margins and control vessels under direct visualization. RESULTS: We present a technical note describing this approach in patients with recurrent rectal cancer involving the pelvic sidewall with extrapelvic extension. CONCLUSION: The posterior-first approach may assist in achieving a higher number of R0 resections in patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer involving the pelvic sidewall.