Goodwin, Matthew L.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: En bloc spondylectomies are essential for controlling malignant spinal tumors, but existing classification systems are often complex and impractical. This study introduces the Column, Line-of-Sight, Margins, Ring (CLiMR) framework, a novel system simplifying and standardizing en bloc spondylectomy planning and classification. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent single- or multistage en bloc spinal tumor resections was conducted at a single academic center (October 2019-December 2024). The CLiMR framework assigns scores to 4 components: Column (osteotomies/diskectomies for tumor release), Line-of-Sight (approach for circumferential access), Margin (adjacent structures sacrificed), and Ring (size of the vertebral ring window for safe delivery of neural tissue). Scores were applied using operative notes and imaging. RESULTS: Column scores ranged from 0.5 to 4.5. Of the patients included, 40.9% underwent sagittal split osteotomies, 22.7% radical diskectomies, 18.2% horizontal osteotomies, and the remaining 18.2% combinations of previous osteotomies . A posterior-only approach (Line-of-Sight score = 1) was used in 45.4% of cases, whereas 45.4% required a multistage approach (score = 2). Margin scores reflected increasing morbidity: 31.8% (n = 7) involving chest wall/pleura resection (grade 3), 40.9% (n = 9) requiring eloquent nerve sacrifice (grade 6), and 9.1% (n = 2) necessitating limb sacrifice (grade 7). The majority (86.4%, n = 19) of ring scores were grade 1, requiring laminectomies/facetectomies. The mean CLiMR score was 9.36 ± 2.43, with higher scores correlating with longer hospital stays (R = 0.64, P = .0012), longer case durations (R = 0.61, P = .0023), and increased blood loss (R = 0.40, P = .067). Patients with local recurrence, positive margins, or complications trended toward greater CLiMR scores. CONCLUSION: The CLiMR framework provides a novel, user-friendly method for planning and communicating en bloc spondylectomies. By addressing technical complexities and morbidity, CLiMR enables standardized assessment, facilitates surgical decision-making, and supports future research. This study demonstrates feasibility and lays the foundation for future validation studies.

Study Design Narrative Review. Objective The management of spinal tumors requires a multi-disciplinary approach including surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy. Surgical approaches typically require posterior segmental instrumentation to maintain long-term spinal stability. Carbon fiber reinforced pedicle screws (CFRP) are increasingly used in the oncologic setting due to reductions in both imaging artifacts and radiotherapy perturbations compared to titanium implants. We performed a review of the literature and highlight advantages and future areas of study for CFRP. Methods We performed a systematic review of the literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and identified 10 articles including 573 patients. Across all studies we reviewed patient demographics, tumor types treated, hardware-related features, complication rates, recurrence, survival, and follow-up. Results Across 10 studies, a total of 1371 screws placed. Surgical and non-surgical complications were reported in 18.3% of patients. Disease progression at the surgical site was detected in 7.3% of patients. There was no significant difference in clinical or hardware complications between CFRP or titanium implants. The most frequent complication attributable to implanted CFRP hardware included screw breakage in 2.4% and loosening in 1.7% of patients, respectively. Conclusion CFRP provide a unique tool in the setting of spinal oncology. With a safety profile comparable to titanium, we review the documented advantages of CFRP posterior implants compared to titanium, while also addressing their current limitations. Additionally, we highlight several areas of future research to identify the optimal patients who will achieve the greatest benefit of CFRP.