Assessing survival in non-small cell lung cancer brain metastases after stereotactic radiosurgery: before and after the start of the targetable mutation era.

PURPOSE: Targeted treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) brain metastases (BMs) may be combined with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to optimize survival. We assessed patient outcomes after SRS for NSCLC BMs, identifying survival trajectories associated with targetable mutations. METHODS: In this retrospective time-dependent analysis, we analyzed median overall survival of patients who received ≥ 1 SRS courses for BM from NSCLC from 2001 to 2021. We compared survival of patients with and without targetable mutations based on clinical variables and treatment. RESULTS: Among the 213 patients included, 87 (40.8%) had targetable mutations-primarily EGFR (22.5%)-and 126 (59.2%) did not. Patients with targetable mutations were more often female (63.2%, p <.001) and nonsmokers (58.6%, p <.001); had higher initial lung-molGPA (2.0 vs. 1.5, p <.001) and lower cumulative tumor volume (3.7 vs. 10.6 cm3, p <.001); and received more concurrent (55.2% vs. 36.5%, p =.007) and total (median 3 vs. 2, p <.001) systemic therapies. These patients had lower mortality rates (74.7% vs. 91.3%, p <.001) and risk (HR 0.298 [95%CI 0.190-0.469], p <.001) and longer median overall survival (20.2 vs. 7.4 months, p <.001), including survival ≥ 3 years (p =.001). Survival was best predicted by SRS with tumor resection in patients with non-targetable mutations (HR 0.491 [95%CI 0.318-757], p =.001) and by systemic therapy with SRS for those with targetable mutations (HR 0.124 [95%CI 0.013-1.153], p =.067). CONCLUSION: The presence of targetable mutations enhances survival in patients receiving SRS for NSCLC BM, particularly when used with systemic therapies. Survival for patients without targetable mutations was longest with SRS and surgical resection. These results inform best practices for managing patients with NSCLC BM based on driver mutation status.

Disparities in Indications and Outcomes Reporting for Spinal Column Shortening for Tethered Cord Syndrome: The Need for a Standardized Approach.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To identify commonly reported indications and outcomes in spinal column shortening (SCS) procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: SCS is a surgical procedure used in patients with tethered cord syndrome (TCS)-characterized by abnormal attachment of neural components to surrounding tissues-to shorten the vertebral column, release tension on the spinal cord/neural elements, and alleviate associated symptoms. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE searches captured SCS literature published between 1950 and 2023. Prospective/retrospective cohort studies and case series were included without age limit or required follow-up period. Review articles without new patient presentations, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, conference abstracts, and letters were excluded. Studies included adult and pediatric patients. RESULTS: The 29 identified studies represented 278 patients (age 5-76 y). In 24.1% of studies, patients underwent primary TCS intervention via SCS. In 41.4% of studies, patients underwent SCS after failed previous primary detethering (24.1% of studies were mixed and 10.3% were unspecified). The most commonly reported non-genitourinary/bowel surgical indications were back pain (55.2%), lower-extremity pain (48.3%), lower-extremity weakness (48.3%), lower-extremity numbness (34.5%), and lower-extremity motor dysfunction (34.5%). Genitourinary/bowel symptoms were most often described as nonspecific bladder dysfunction (58.6%), bladder incontinence (34.5%), and bowel dysfunction (31.0%). After SCS, non-genitourinary/bowel outcomes included lower-extremity pain (44.8%), back pain (31.0%), and lower-extremity sensory and motor function (both 31.0%). Bladder dysfunction (79.3%), bowel dysfunction (34.5%), and bladder incontinence (13.8%) were commonly reported genitourinary/bowel outcomes. In total, 40 presenting surgical indication categories and 33 unique outcome measures were reported across studies. Seventeen of the 278 patients (6.1%) experienced a complication. CONCLUSION: The SCS surgical literature displays variability in operative indications and postoperative outcomes. The lack of common reporting mechanisms impedes higher-level analysis. A standardized outcomes measurement tool, encompassing both patient-reported outcome measures and objective metrics, is necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

Lumbar Epidural Hematoma as a Rare Complication From Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common and debilitating pathology globally. Conservative and surgical treatment options exist for patients. Recently, minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD) has been described as a less invasive technique for the treatment of early spinal stenosis ≥2.5mm ligamentum thickening or in patients at high risk for general anesthesia. Often, MILD is performed by interventional pain providers and shows low complication rates. We describe a 76-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department immediately after undergoing a MILD procedure at an outside surgery center with lower back/sacral pain resulting from an acute epidural hematoma extending from T12-L3. Early recognition and surgical evacuation resulted in a good outcome with no complications. Our goal is to increase awareness of this rare complication and encourage multidisciplinary approaches to managing LSS between spine surgeons and pain providers.