Marion, Joseph T

AbstractBackgroundThis study was aimed at developing and validating a decision‐making tool predictive of overall survival (OS) for patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spinal metastases.MethodsThree hundred sixty‐one patients at one institution were used for the training set, and 182 at a second institution were used for external validation. Treatments most commonly involved one or three fractions of spine SBRT. Exclusion criteria included proton therapy and benign histologies.ResultsThe final model consisted of the following variables and scores: Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) ≥ 6 (1), time from primary diagnosis < 21 months (1), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status = 1 (1) or ECOG performance status > 1 (2), and >1 organ system involved (1). Each variable was an independent predictor of OS (p < .001), and each 1‐point increase in the score was associated with a hazard ratio of 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.79–2.25; p < .0001). The concordance value was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71–0.78). The scores were discretized into three groups—favorable (score = 0–1), intermediate (score = 2), and poor survival (score = 3–5)—with 2‐year OS rates of 84% (95% CI, 79%–90%), 46% (95% CI, 36%–59%), and 21% (95% CI, 14%–32%), respectively (p < .0001 for each). In the external validation set (182 patients), the score was also predictive of OS (p < .0001). Increasing SINS<zaq;6> was predictive of decreased OS as a continuous variable (p < .0001).ConclusionsThis novel score is proposed as a decision‐making tool to help to optimize patient selection for spine SBRT. SINS may be an independent predictor of OS.

Purpose Compare functional outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy with either local anesthesia or conscious sedation. Secondarily, identify differences in hemodynamic parameters and complication rates between groups. Materials and methods Single institution, retrospective review of all acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy between January 2014 and July 2018 ( n = 185). Patients receiving general anesthesia ( n = 27) were excluded. One-hundred and eleven of 158 (70.3%) composed the local anesthesia group, and 47 (29.7%) composed the conscious sedation group. Median age was 71 years (interquartile range 59–79). Seventy-eight (49.4%) were male. The median National Institute of Health stroke scale score was 17.5 (interquartile range 11–21). Hemodynamic, medication, complication, and functional outcome data were collected from the anesthesia protocol and medical records. Good functional outcome was defined as a three-month modified Rankin Scale < 2. A multivariate analysis was performed to estimate the association of anesthesia type on three-month modified Rankin Scale score. Results Three-month modified Rankin Scale score <2 was similar between groups ( p = 0.5). Patients receiving conscious sedation were on average younger than patients receiving local anesthesia ( p = 0.01). Conscious sedation patients were more likely to receive intravenous thrombolytic prior to embolectomy ( p = 0.025). The complication rate and hemodynamic parameters were similar between groups. Conclusion Functional outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing embolectomy appears to be similar for patients receiving local anesthesia and conscious sedation. This similarity may be beneficial to a future study comparing general anesthesia to local anesthesia and conscious sedation. The use of local anesthesia or conscious sedation does not significantly impact hemodynamic status.