Gokaslan, Ziya L.

Study Design: This is a retrospective study. Objective: To report the safety profile of S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) in patients over 60, comparing S2AI screws with iliac screws (ISs). Summary of Background Data: The surgical management involving the lumbosacropelvic spine remains a challenge due to high mechanical demand and risk of pseudarthrosis. Previous articles showed lower rates of complications in patients receiving S2AI screws than ISs; however, none of them have focused on patients aged over 60 who may harbor significant comorbidities and thus require more meticulous perioperative management, given these invasive and lengthy procedures. Materials and Methods: Retrospective review of clinical records from 2010 to 2015 identified 60 patients undergoing lumbosacropelvic fixation (17 patients with ISs and 43 patients with S2AI screws) who satisfied the following criteria: (1) patients aged over 60 years old and (2) patients with >1-year follow-up periods. Rates of complications such as unplanned reoperation and cardiorespiratory complications were collected and statistically analyzed. Results: Baseline characteristics such as age, sex, and comorbidities were similar in both groups. The S2AI group had lower rates of reoperation (18.6% vs. 47.4%; P=0.02), surgical site infection (2.3% vs. 29.4%; P=0.006), wound dehiscence (2.3% vs. 29.4%; P=0.006), and postoperative anemia (7.0% vs. 29.4%; P=0.03) and had lower total volume of estimated blood loss (EBL) (mL) (1846.4 vs. 2721.2; P=0.02) and transfused red blood cell units (7.2 vs. 4.7; P=0.04) than the IS group, while rates of L5–S1 pseudarthrosis and other cardiorespiratory complications were similar in both groups. In multivariate analysis, operative time, body mass index, and use of S2AI screws over ISs were independent predictors of EBL. Conclusions: Use of S2AI screws over ISs in patients aged over 60 was associated with lower rates of reoperation, surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, and lower volume of EBL and red blood cell transfusion and is a viable surgical option.

Abstract Background The treatment of oligometastatic (≤5 metastases) spinal disease has trended toward ablative therapies, yet to the authors’ knowledge little is known regarding the prognosis of patients presenting with oligometastatic spinal disease and the value of this approach. The objective of the current study was to compare the survival and clinical outcomes of patients with cancer with oligometastatic spinal disease with those of patients with polymetastatic (>5 metastases) disease. Methods The current study was an international, multicenter, prospective study. Patients who were admitted to a participating spine center with a diagnosis of spinal metastases and who underwent surgical intervention and/or radiotherapy between August 2013 and May 2017 were included. Data collected included demographics, overall survival, local control, and treatment information including surgical, radiotherapy, and systemic therapy details. Health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) measures included the EuroQOL 5 dimensions 3‐level questionnaire (EQ‐5D‐3L), the 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey (SF‐36v2), and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ). Results Of the 393 patients included in the current study, 215 presented with oligometastatic disease and 178 presented with polymetastatic disease. A significant survival advantage of 90.1% versus 77.3% at 3 months and 77.0% versus 65.1% at 6 months from the time of treatment was found for patients presenting with oligometastatic disease compared with those with polymetastatic disease. It is important to note that both groups experienced significant improvements in multiple HRQOL measures at 6 months after treatment, with no differences in these outcome measures noted between the 2 groups. Conclusions The treatment of oligometastatic disease appears to offer a significant survival advantage compared with polymetastatic disease, regardless of treatment choice. HRQOL measures were found to improve in both groups, demonstrating a palliative benefit for all treated patients.

BACKGROUND This study was designed to identify preoperative predictors of survival in surgically treated patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC), to examine how these predictors are related to 8 prognostic models, and to perform the first full external validation of these models in accordance with the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement. METHODS One hundred forty‐two surgically treated patients with MESCC were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter North American cohort study and were followed for 12 months or until death. Cox regression was used. Noncollinear predictors with < 10% missing data, with ≥ 10 events per stratum, and with P < .05 in a univariate analysis were tested through a backward stepwise selection. For the original and revised Tokuhashi prognostic scoring systems (PSSs), Tomita PSS, modified Bauer PSS, van der Linden PSS, Bartels model, Oswestry Spinal Risk Index, and Bollen PSS, this study examined calibration graphically, discrimination with Harrell c‐statistics, and survival stratified by risk groups with the Kaplan‐Meier method and log‐rank test. RESULTS The following were significant in the univariate analysis: type of primary tumor, sex, organ metastasis, body mass index, preoperative radiotherapy to MESCC, physical component (PC) of the 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey, version 2 (SF‐36v2), and EuroQol 5‐Dimension (EQ‐5D) Questionnaire. Breast, prostate and thyroid primary tumor (HR: 2.9; P =.0005), presence of organ metastasis (hazard ratio (HR): 2.0; P = .005) and SF‐36v2 PC (HR: 0.95; P < .0001) were associated with survival in multivariable analysis. Predicted prognoses poorly matched observed values on calibration plots; Bartels model calibration slope was 0.45. Bollen PSS (0.61; 95% CI: 0.58‐0.64) and Bartels model (0.68; 95% CI: 0.65‐0.71) had the lowest and highest c‐statistics, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The primary tumor type (breast, prostate, or thyroid), an absence of organ metastasis, and a lower degree of physical disability are preoperative predictors of longer survival for surgical MESCC patients. These results are in keeping with current models. This full external validation of 8 prognostic PSSs or model of survival in surgical MESCC patients has revealed that calibration is poor, especially for long‐term survivors, whereas discrimination is possibly helpful.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to answer the following questions regarding the use of steroid therapy in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC): 1. In cases of MSCC, what is the effect of steroid administration before definitive radiotherapy or surgery on ambulatory status, bowel and bladder function and survival? 2. What steroid dosing regimens are associated with the best outcomes concerning neurological symptoms and complication prevention in cases of MSCC? Summary of Background Data: Currently, there is significant variation in the initial bolus dose, daily maintenance dose and duration of treatment when steroids are used as a bridge to definitive therapy for MSCC. Methods: A literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted in June 2016, using Medline via Ovid SP, Medline via PubMed, Embase, Biosis Previews and the Cochrane Library. Search terms used in each database varied slightly to optimize results. All generic steroid formulations were included along with spinal cord compression or myelopathy combined with metastatic or malignant tumors. Papers discussing acute traumatic causes of spinal cord compression were excluded, as were papers discussing cord compression from nonmetastatic tumors or epidural lipomatosis. Subjects were limited to adult humans undergoing definitive treatment with radiotherapy or surgery. Results: Of the 309 papers retrieved, 66 full text studies were reviewed and 6 papers were found to address the stated questions. Conclusions: There is a paucity of high quality literature evaluating the use of steroids in MSCC. On the basis of the evidence available an initial 10 mg intravenous bolus of dexamethasone followed by 16 mg PO QD has been associated with fewer complications compared with 100 mg bolus and 96 mg QD. Weaning of steroids should occur rapidly after definitive treatment. Risk of gastric bleeding or perforation can be managed with the routine use of proton-pump inhibitors. Level of Evidence: Level IIIa.

BACKGROUNDThe Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ) was developed as the first spine oncology‐specific health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) measure. This study evaluated the psychometric properties and clinical validity of the SOSGOQ in a diverse cohort of patients with spinal metastases.METHODSAn international, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study including patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery and/or radiotherapy was conducted by the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Demographic, tumor, and treatment data were collected. HRQOL was evaluated using the SOSGOQ and Medical Outcomes Study Questionnaire Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF‐36) at baseline and fixed follow‐up times. Construct validity was assessed using multitrait scaling analyses, confirmatory factor analyses, and correlation with the SF‐36 and NRS pain score. Test‐retest reliability was assessed in a subgroup of patients between 12 weeks after treatment and the retest 4 to 9 days later.RESULTSA total of 238 patients were enrolled at 9 centers across North America; 153 of these patients had HRQOL data available at 12 weeks after treatment. Multitrait scaling analyses and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in a refined version of the SOSGOQ with 4 domains and 4 single items. The revised SOSGOQ (SOSGOQ2.0) demonstrated strong correlations with SF‐36 and the ability to discriminate between clinically distinct patient groups. Reliability of the SOSGOQ2.0 was demonstrated to be good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient ranging from 0.58 to 0.92 for the different domains.CONCLUSIONSThe SOSGOQ2.0 is a reliable and valid measure with which to evaluate HRQOL in patients with spinal metastases. It is recommended to use the SOSGOQ2.0 together with a generic HRQOL outcome measure to comprehensively assess HRQOL and increase sensitivity and specificity. Cancer 2018;124:1828‐38. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

OBJECTIVEAggressive sacral tumors often require en bloc resection and lumbopelvic reconstruction. Instrumentation failure and pseudarthrosis remain a clinical concern to be addressed. The objective in this study was to compare the biomechanical stability of 3 distinct techniques for sacral reconstruction in vitro.METHODSIn a human cadaveric model study, 8 intact human lumbopelvic specimens (L2–pelvis) were tested for flexion-extension range of motion (ROM), lateral bending, and axial rotation with a custom-designed 6-df spine simulator as well as axial compression stiffness with the MTS 858 Bionix Test System. Biomechanical testing followed this sequence: 1) intact spine; 2) sacrectomy (no testing); 3) Model 1 (L3–5 transpedicular instrumentation plus spinal rods anchored to iliac screws); 4) Model 2 (addition of transiliac rod); and 5) Model 3 (removal of transiliac rod; addition of 2 spinal rods and 2 S-2 screws). Range of motion was measured at L4–5, L5–S1/cross-link, L5–right ilium, and L5–left ilium.RESULTSFlexion-extension ROM of the intact specimen at L4–5 (6.34° ± 2.57°) was significantly greater than in Model 1 (1.54° ± 0.94°), Model 2 (1.51° ± 1.01°), and Model 3 (0.72° ± 0.62°) (p < 0.001). Flexion-extension at both the L5–right ilium (2.95° ± 1.27°) and the L5–left ilium (2.87° ± 1.40°) for Model 3 was significantly less than the other 3 cohorts at the same level (p = 0.005 and p = 0.012, respectively). Compared with the intact condition, all 3 reconstruction groups statistically significantly decreased lateral bending ROM at all measured points. Axial rotation ROM at L4–5 for Model 1 (2.01° ± 1.39°), Model 2 (2.00° ± 1.52°), and Model 3 (1.15° ± 0.80°) was significantly lower than the intact condition (5.02° ± 2.90°) (p < 0.001). Moreover, axial rotation for the intact condition and Model 3 at L5–right ilium (2.64° ± 1.36° and 2.93° ± 1.68°, respectively) and L5–left ilium (2.58° ± 1.43° and 2.93° ± 1.71°, respectively) was significantly lower than for Model 1 and Model 2 at L5–right ilium (5.14° ± 2.48° and 4.95° ± 2.45°, respectively) (p = 0.036) and L5–left ilium (5.19° ± 2.34° and 4.99° ± 2.31°) (p = 0.022). Last, results of the axial compression testing at all measured points were not statistically different among reconstructions.CONCLUSIONSThe addition of a transverse bar in Model 2 offered no biomechanical advantage. Although the implementation of 4 iliac screws and 4 rods conferred a definitive kinematic advantage in Model 3, that model was associated with significantly restricted lumbopelvic ROM.

Study Design: Systematic review. Objective: Surgical decompression and reconstruction of symptomatic spinal metastases has improved the quality of life in cancer patients. However, most data has been collected on cohorts of patients with mixed tumor histopathology. We systematically reviewed the literature for prognostic factors specific to the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine. Methods: A systemic review of the literature was conducted to answer the following questions: Question 1. Describe the survival and functional outcomes of surgery or vertebral augmentation for prostate metastases to the spine. Question 2. Determine whether overall tumor burden, Gleason score, preoperative functional markers, and hormonal naivety favor operative intervention. Question 3. Establish whether clinical outcomes vary with the evolution of operative techniques. Results: A total of 16 studies met the preset inclusion criteria. All included studies were retrospective series with a level of evidence of IV. Included studies consistently showed a large effect of hormone-naivety on overall survival. Additionally, studies consistently demonstrated an improvement in motor function and the ability to maintain/regain ambulation following surgery resulting in moderate strength of recommendation. All other parameters were of insufficient or low strength. Conclusions: There is a dearth of literature regarding the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine, which represents an opportunity for future research. Based on existing evidence, it appears that the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine has consistently favorable results. While no consistent preoperative indicators favor nonoperative treatment, hormone-naivety and high Karnofsky performance scores have positive effects on survival and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVEPrimary osteosarcoma of the spine is a rare osseous neoplasm. While previously reported retrospective studies have demonstrated that overall patient survival is impacted mostly by en bloc resection and chemotherapy, the continued management of residual disease remains to be elucidated. This systematic review was designed to address the role of revision surgery and multimodal adjuvant therapy in cases in which en bloc excision is not initially achieved.METHODSA systematic literature search spanning the years 1966 to 2015 was performed on PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science to identify reports describing outcomes of patients who underwent biopsy alone, neurological decompression, or intralesional resection for osteosarcoma of the spine. Studies were reviewed qualitatively, and the clinical course of individual patients was aggregated for quantitative meta-analysis.RESULTSA total of 16 studies were identified for inclusion in the systematic review, of which 8 case reports were summarized qualitatively. These studies strongly support the role of chemotherapy for overall survival and moderately support adjuvant radiation therapy for local control. The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant benefit in overall survival for performing revision tumor debulking (p = 0.01) and also for chemotherapy at relapse (p < 0.01). Adjuvant radiation therapy was associated with longer survival, although this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.06).CONCLUSIONSWhile the initial therapeutic goal in the management of osteosarcoma of the spine is neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by en bloc marginal resection, this objective is not always achievable given anatomical constraints and other limitations at the time of initial clinical presentation. This systematic review supports the continued aggressive use of revision surgery and multimodal adjuvant therapy when possible to improve outcomes in patients who initially undergo subtotal debulking of osteosarcoma. A limitation of this systematic review is that lesions amenable to subsequent resection or tumors inherently more sensitive to adjuvants would exaggerate a therapeutic effect of these interventions when studied in a retrospective fashion.

Study Design: Multicenter retrospective case series. Objective: To determine the rate of thoracic duct injury during cervical spine operations. Methods: A retrospective case series study was conducted among 21 high-volume surgical centers to identify instances of thoracic duct injury during anterior cervical spine surgery. Staff at each center abstracted data for each identified case into case report forms. All case report forms were collected by the AOSpine North America Clinical Research Network Methodological Core for data processing, cleaning, and analysis. Results: Of a total of 9591 patients reviewed that underwent cervical spine surgery, 2 (0.02%) incurred iatrogenic injury to the thoracic duct. Both patients underwent a left-sided anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. The interruption of the thoracic duct was addressed intraoperatively in one patient with no residual postoperative effects. The second individual developed a chylous fluid collection approximately 2 months after the operation that required drainage via needle aspiration. Conclusions: Damage to the thoracic duct during cervical spine surgery is a relatively rare occurrence. Rapid identification of the disruption of this lymphatic vessel is critical to minimize deleterious effects of this complication.