The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
Open Access
- 28 February 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Global Spine Journal
- Vol. 13 (7) , 1793-1802
Abstract
Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objectives: To compare outcomes of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) to open posterior stabilization (OPS) in spinal instability patients and minimal access separation surgery (MASS) to open posterior stabilization and decompression (OPSD) in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) patients. Methods: We analysed patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar metastatic spine disease (MSD) from Jan 2011 to Oct 2017. Patients were divided into minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open spine surgery (OSS) groups. Spinal instability patients were treated with PPSF/OPS with pedicle screws. MSCC patients were treated with MASS/OPSD. Outcomes measured included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, duration of hospital stay and ASIA-score improvement. Time to initiate radiotherapy and perioperative surgical/non-surgical complications was recorded. Propensity scoring adjustment analysis was utilised to address heterogenicity of histological tumour subtypes. Results: Of 200 eligible patients, 61 underwent MISS and 139 underwent OSS for MSD. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between MISS and OSS groups. In the MISS group, 28 (45.9%) patients were treated for spinal instability and 33 (54.1%) patients were treated for MSCC. In the OSS group, 15 (10.8%) patients were treated for spinal instability alone and 124 (89.2%) were treated for MSCC. Patients who underwent PPSF had significantly lower blood loss (95 mL vs 564 mL; P < .001) and surgical complication rates( P < .05) with shorter length of stay approaching significance (6 vs 19 days; P = .100) when compared to the OPS group. Patients who underwent MASS had significantly lower blood loss (602 mL vs 1008 mL) and shorter length of stay (10 vs 18 days; P = .098) vs the OPSD group. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the benefits of PPSF and MASS over OPS and OPSD for the treatment of MSD with spinal instability and MSCC, respectively.Keywords
This publication has 33 references indexed in Scilit:
- Current Paradigms for Metastatic Spinal Disease: An Evidence-Based ReviewAnnals of Surgical Oncology, 2013
- The NOMS Framework: Approach to the Treatment of Spinal Metastatic TumorsThe Oncologist, 2013
- Complications in the management of metastatic spinal diseaseWorld Journal of Orthopedics, 2012
- A Systematic Review of the Current Role of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Management of Metastatic Spine DiseaseInternational Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2011
- Palliative Radiotherapy for Bone Metastases: An ASTRO Evidence-Based GuidelineInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology - Biology - Physics (IJROBP), 2011
- Mini-open transpedicular corpectomies with expandable cage reconstructionJournal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2011
- A Novel Classification System for Spinal Instability in Neoplastic DiseaseSpine, 2010
- Reliability analysis of the epidural spinal cord compression scaleJournal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2010
- The hospital burden of disease associated with bone metastases and skeletal-related events in patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, or prostate cancer in SpainEuropean Journal of Cancer Care, 2009
- Complications of vertebral metastasis surgeryEuropean Spine Journal, 1998