Rapid improvements in pain and quality of life are sustained after surgery for spinal metastases in a large prospective cohort.

Introduction Metastatic spinal cancer is a common condition that may lead to spinal instability, pain and paralysis. In the 1980s, surgery was discouraged because results showed worse neurological outcomes and pain compared with radiotherapy alone. However, with the advent of modern imaging and spinal stabilisation techniques, the role of surgery has regained centre stage, though few studies have assessed quality of life and functional outcomes after surgery. Objective We investigated whether surgery provides sustained improvement in quality of life and pain relief for patients with symptomatic spinal metastases by analysing the largest reported surgical series of patients with epidural spinal metastases. Methods A prospective cohort study of 922 consecutive patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery, from the Global Spine Tumour Study Group database. Pre- and post-operative EQ-5D quality of life, visual analogue pain score, Karnofsky physical functioning score, complication rates and survival were recorded. Results Quality of life (EQ-5D), VAS pain score and Karnofsky physical functioning score improved rapidly after surgery and these improvements were sustained in those patients who survived up to 2 years after surgery. In specialised spine centres, the technical intra-operative complication rate of surgery was low, however almost a quarter of patients experienced post-operative systemic adverse events. Conclusion Surgical treatment for spinal metastases produces rapid pain relief, maintains ambulation and improves good quality of life. However, as a group, patients with cancer are vulnerable to post-operative systemic complications, hence the importance of appropriate patient selection.

A novel risk calculator to predict outcome after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases; use of a large prospective patient database to personalise surgical management.

AIM: Surgery for spinal metastases can improve symptoms, but sometimes complications can negate the benefits. Operations may have different indications, complexities and risks, and the choice for an individual is a tailor-made personalised decision. Previous prognostic scoring systems are becoming out of date and inaccurate. We designed a risk calculator to estimate survival after surgery, to inform clinicians and patients when making management decisions. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed, including 1430 patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery. Of them, 1264 patients from 20 centres were used for model development using a Cox frailty model. Calibration slope, D-statistic and C-index were used for model validation based on 166 patients. Follow-up was to death or minimum of 2 years after surgery. Pre-operative indices (examination findings, pain, Karnofsky physical functioning score, and radiology) were assessed. RESULTS: An algorithm to predict survival was constructed including the tumour type, ambulatory status, analgesic use, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, number of spinal metastases, previous radiotherapy or chemotherapy, presence of visceral metastases, cervical or thoracic spine involvement, as predictors. An Internet-based risk calculator was developed based on this algorithm, with similar or improved accuracy compared to other validated prognostic scoring systems (C-index, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.63--0.73, and calibration slope, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.68--1.32). CONCLUSION: A large, prospective, surgical series of patients with symptomatic spinal metastases was used to create a validated risk calculator that can help clinicians to inform patients about the most appropriate treatment plan. The calculator is available at www.spinemet.com.

Loss of Local Tumor Control After Index Surgery for Spinal Metastases: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: As survival after treatment for symptomatic spinal metastases increases, the incidence of local tumor recurrence also may increase. However, data regarding incidence and timing of recurrence or duration of survival after second surgeries are not readily available and may help to inform clinicians when to perform second surgeries. OBJECTIVE: To identify features associated with loss of local control (LLC) at a previously treated or new spinal level. METHODS: Clinical and surgical data were collected from a prospective cohort of 1421 patients who had surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases. Patients undergoing repeat spinal surgery for symptomatic LLC at the same or a different level were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 3.0% patients underwent repeat surgery for symptomatic LLC after a median interval of 184 days from the first surgery; median survival was 6.1 months after second surgery. Factors associated with second surgery for LLC were the primary tumor type, number of spinal levels, Tomita staging, Tokuhashi and Karnofsky scores, anterior surgical approach, more aggressive surgical resection, and postoperative radiotherapy. In total, 1.5% patients were admitted for surgery for a different spinal level than the index operation after median 338 days from the first operation. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood for repeat surgery due to LLC cannot be accurately predicted at the time of initial presentation. Factors associated with second surgery for LLC relate to less aggressive tumor biology and better survival. Most patients had a reasonable duration of survival after second surgery.

Characteristics of Patients Who Survived < 3 Months or > 2 Years After Surgery for Spinal Metastases: Can We Avoid Inappropriate Patient Selection?

PURPOSE: Survival after metastatic cancer has improved at the cost of increased presentation with metastatic spinal disease. For patients with pathologic spinal fractures and/or spinal cord compression, surgical intervention may relieve pain and improve quality of life. Surgery is generally considered to be inappropriate if anticipated survival is < 3 months. The aim of this international multicenter study was to analyze data from patients who died within 3 months or 2 years after surgery, to identify preoperative factors associated with poor or good survival, and to avoid inappropriate selection of patients for surgery in the future. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,266 patients underwent surgery for impending pathologic fractures and/or neurologic deficits and were prospectively observed. Data collected included tumor characteristics, preoperative fitness (American Society of Anesthesiologists advisory [ASA]), neurologic status (Frankel scale), performance (Karnofsky performance score [KPS]), and quality of life (EuroQol five-dimensions questionnaire [EQ-5D]). Outcomes were survival at 3 months and 2 years postsurgery. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to find preoperative factors associated with short-term and long-term survival. RESULTS: In univariable analysis, age, emergency surgery, KPS, EQ-5D, ASA, Frankel, and Tokuhashi/Tomita scores were significantly associated with short survival. In multivariable analysis, KPS and age were significantly associated with short survival (odds ratio [OR], 1.36; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.62; and OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.27, respectively). Associated with longer survival in univariable analysis were age, number of levels included in surgery, KPS, EQ-5D, Frankel, and Tokuhashi/Tomita scores. In multivariable analysis, the number of levels included in surgery (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.38) and primary tumor type were significantly associated with longer survival. CONCLUSION: Poor performance status at presentation is the strongest indicator of poor short-term survival, whereas low disease load and favorable tumor histology are associated with longer-term survival.