Comparison of Classically and Machine Learning Generated Survival Prediction Models for Patients With Spinal Metastasis - A meta-Analysis of Two Recently Developed Algorithms.

STUDY DESIGN: A systemic review and a meta-analysis. We also provided a retrospective cohort for validation in this study. OBJECTIVE: (1) Using a meta-analysis to determine the pooled discriminatory ability of The Skeletal Oncology Research Group (SORG) classical algorithm (CA) and machine learning algorithms (MLA); and (2) test the hypothesis that SORG-CA has less variability in performance than SORG-MLA in non-American validation cohorts as SORG-CA does not incorporates regional-specific variables such as body mass index as input. METHODS: After data extraction from the included studies, logit-transformation was applied for extracted AUCs for further analysis. The discriminatory abilities of both algorithms were directly compared by their logit (AUC)s. Further subgroup analysis by region (America vs non-America) was also conducted by comparing the corresponding logit (AUC). RESULTS: The pooled logit (AUC)s of 90-day SORG-CA was .82 (95% confidence interval [CI], .53-.11), 1-year SORG-CA was 1.11 (95% CI, .74-1.48), 90-day SORG-MLA was 1.36 (95% CI, 1.09-1.63), and 1-year SORG-MLA was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.17-1.98). All the algorithms performed better in United States than in Taiwan (P < .001). The performance of SORG-CA was less influenced by a non-American cohort than SORG-MLA. CONCLUSION: These observations might highlight the importance of incorporating region-specific variables into existing models to make them generalizable to racially or geographically distinct regions.

Streamlining the Journey of Research Into Clinical Practice: Making Your Patients and Practice Flourish Understanding and Setting Treatment Expectations for Patients With Metastatic Spine Tumors.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature review with clinical recommendation. OBJECTIVE: A concise curation of the latest spine literature exploring the relationship between expectations and satisfaction for patients with metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Deliver recommendations to practicing clinicians regarding interpretation and utilisation of this evidence. METHODS: The latest spine literature in the topic of factors affecting the expectations of patients with MSD was reviewed and clinical recommendations were formulated. Recommendations are graded as strong or Conditional. RESULTS: 5 articles were selected. Article 1: risk factors for the development of dissatisfaction from a cohort of 362 MSD patients. Strong recommendation to incorporate risk factor assessment when considering treatment. Article 2: systematic review assessing the relationship between pre-operative patient expectations and subsequent satisfaction in allied disciplines. Conditional recommendation to optimize patient expectation to positively modify patient satisfaction. Article 3: qualitative study of how clinicians, from different specialties, counsel patients with MSD pre-treatment. Strong recommendation to use a multidisciplinary approach. Article 4 qualitative study of how MSD patients experience their pre-treatment counselling and how that affected their appreciation of treatment success. Conditional recommendation to furnish patients with tailored, expected outcomes in the context of systemic progression. Article 5 Design and validation of a pre-treatment questionnaire specific to MSD. A conditional recommendation to incorporate this questionnaire in clinical and research MSD practice. CONCLUSION: Patients with MSD are approaching end of life care and high levels of treatment satisfaction are crucial at this juncture. The role of expectation management and comprehensive counselling is critical.

Remineralization Rate of Lytic Lesions of the Spine in Multiple Myeloma Patients Undergoing Radiation Therapy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: In general, Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients are treated with systemic therapy including chemotherapy. Radiation therapy can have an important supportive role in the palliative management of MM-related osteolytic lesions. Our study aims to investigate the degree of radiation-induced remineralization in MM patients to gain a better understanding of its potential impact on bone mineral density and, consequently, fracture prevention. Our primary outcome measure was percent change in bone mineral density measured in Hounsfield Units (Δ% HU) between pre- and post-radiation measurements, compared to non-targeted vertebrae. METHODS: We included 119 patients with MM who underwent radiotherapy of the spine between January 2010 and June 2021 and who had a CT scan of the spine at baseline and between 3-24 months after radiation. A linear mixed effect model tested any differences in remineralization rate per month (ßdifference) between targeted and non-targeted vertebrae. RESULTS: Analyses of CT scans yielded 565 unique vertebrae (366 targeted and 199 non-targeted vertebrae). In both targeted and non-targeted vertebrae, there was an increase in bone density per month (ßoverall = .04; P = .002) with the largest effect being between 9-18 months post-radiation. Radiation did not cause a greater increase in bone density per month compared to non-targeted vertebrae (ßdifference = .67; P = .118). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that following radiation, bone density increased over time for both targeted and non-targeted vertebrae. However, no conclusive evidence was found that targeted vertebrae have a higher remineralization rate than non-targeted vertebrae in patients with MM.

Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review.

Introduction: The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique. Research question: to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group. Results: After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2). Discussion and conclusion: For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention.

Impact of intraoperative imaging on decision-making during spine surgery: a survey among spine surgeons using simulated intraoperative images.

PURPOSE: To assess whether the intention to intraoperatively reposition pedicle screws differs when spine surgeons evaluate the same screws with 2D imaging or 3D imaging. METHODS: In this online survey study, 21 spine surgeons evaluated eight pedicle screws from patients who had undergone posterior spinal fixation. In a simulated intraoperative setting, surgeons had to decide if they would reposition a marked pedicle screw based on its position in the provided radiologic imaging. The eight assessed pedicle screws varied in radiologic position, including two screws positioned within the pedicle, two breaching the pedicle cortex < 2 mm, two breaching the pedicle cortex 2-4 mm, and two positioned completely outside the pedicle. Surgeons assessed each pedicle screw twice without knowing and in random order: once with a scrollable three-dimensional (3D) image and once with two oblique fluoroscopic two-dimensional (2D) images. RESULTS: Almost all surgeons (19/21) intended to reposition more pedicle screws based on 3D imaging than on 2D imaging, with a mean number of pedicle screws to be repositioned of, respectively, 4.1 (± 1.3) and 2.0 (± 1.3; p < 0.001). Surgeons intended to reposition two screws placed completely outside the pedicle, one breaching 2-4mm, and one breaching < 2 mm more often based on 3D imaging. CONCLUSION: When provided with 3D imaging, spine surgeons not only intend to intraoperatively reposition pedicle screws at risk of causing postoperative complications more often but also screws with acceptable positions. This study highlights the potential of intraoperative 3D imaging as well as the need for consensus on how to act on intraoperative 3D information.

Stereotactic Body and Conventional Radiotherapy for Painful Bone Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Conventional external beam radiotherapy (cEBRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are commonly used treatment options for relieving metastatic bone pain. The effectiveness of SBRT compared with cEBRT in pain relief has been a subject of debate, and conflicting results have been reported. Objective: To compare the effectiveness associated with SBRT vs cEBRT for relieving metastatic bone pain. Data Sources: A structured search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases on June 5, 2023. Additionally, results were added from a new randomized clinical trial (RCT) and additional unpublished data from an already published RCT. Study Selection: Comparative studies reporting pain response after SBRT vs cEBRT in patients with painful bone metastases. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent reviewers extracted data from eligible studies. Data were extracted for the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. The study is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall and complete pain response at 1, 3, and 6 months after radiotherapy, according to the study's definition. Relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated for each study. A random-effects model using a restricted maximum likelihood estimator was applied for meta-analysis. Results: There were 18 studies with 1685 patients included in the systematic review and 8 RCTs with 1090 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 7 RCTs, overall pain response was defined according to the International Consensus on Palliative Radiotherapy Endpoints in clinical trials (ICPRE). The complete pain response was reported in 6 RCTs, all defined according to the ICPRE. The ITT meta-analyses showed that the overall pain response rates did not differ between cEBRT and SBRT at 1 (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30), 3 (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96-1.47), or 6 (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.96-1.54) months. However, SBRT was associated with a higher complete pain response at 1 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.01), 3 (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.16-2.78), and 6 (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.24-4.91) months after radiotherapy. The PP meta-analyses showed comparable results. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, patients with painful bone metastases experienced similar overall pain response after SBRT compared with cEBRT. More patients had complete pain alleviation after SBRT, suggesting that selected subgroups will benefit from SBRT.

The prevalence of vertebral fractures in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis and ankylosing spondylitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Subjects with ankylosing spinal disorders, including diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are more prone to vertebral fractures and frequently present with neurological deficit compared to the patients without an ankylosed spine. Moreover, prevalent vertebral fractures are an important predictor for subsequent fracture risk. However, the pooled fracture prevalence for DISH is unknown and less recent for AS. We aimed to systematically investigate the prevalence and risk of vertebral fractures in DISH and AS populations. Methods: Publications in Medline and EMBASE were searched from January 1980 until July 2023 for cohort studies reporting vertebral fractures in AS and DISH. Data on prevalence were pooled with random effects modeling after double arcsine transformation. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics and we performed subgroup analysis and meta-regression to explore sources of heterogeneity. Results: We included 7 studies on DISH (n = 1,193, total fractures = 231) with a pooled vertebral fracture prevalence of 22.6% (95%CI: 13.4%-33.4%). For AS, 26 studies were included (n = 2,875, total fractures = 460) with a pooled vertebral fracture prevalence of 15.2% (95%CI: 11.6%-19.1%). In general, fracture prevalence for AS remained similar for several study-level and clinically relevant characteristics, including study design, diagnostic criteria, spine level, and patient characteristics in subgroup analysis. AS publications from 2010 to 2020 showed higher fracture prevalence compared to 1990 to 2010 (18.6% vs. 11.6%). Fractures in DISH were most common at the thoracolumbar junction, whereas for AS, the most common location was the mid-thoracic spine. Conclusions: Vertebral fractures are prevalent in AS and DISH populations. Differences in fracture distribution along the spinal axis exist between the 2 disorders. Additional longitudinal studies are needed for incident fracture assessment in patients with ankylosing spinal disorders.