Spinal Metastases at the Thoracolumbar Junction - Influencing Factors for Surgical Decision-making According to a Multicentric Registry

Overview

Journal Brain Spine

Specialty Neurology

Date 2025 Mar 5

PMID 40041395

Authors

Vanessa Hubertus

Arthur Wagner

Arian Karbe

Leon-Gordian Leonhardt

Beate Kunze

Susanne Borchert

Fatma Kilinc

Michelle Marino

Nitzan Nissimov

Charlotte Buhre

Marcus Czabanka

Marc Dreimann

Sven O Eicker

Lennart Viezens

Hanno S Meyer

Peter Vajkoczy

Bernhard Meyer

Julia S Onken

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Spinal metastases at the thoracolumbar junction (TLJ) pose a significant risk for spinal instability and necessitate special considerations regarding surgical management. Longer patient survival due to improved oncologic therapies may justify extensive instrumented surgery.

Research Question: The aim of this study was to analyze the standard of care in a large multicentric cohort of patients with TLJ metastases regarding surgical decision-making, management, and associated morbidity.

Material And Methods: Patients with surgically treated spinal metastases at the TLJ between 2010 and 2022 were enrolled at five academic tertiary spine centers. Epidemiological, surgical, clinical, and outcome data was assessed retrospectively. Surgical management was sorted according to three groups: decompression ( ), decompression and posterior instrumentation ( ), and decompression and 360° instrumentation with vertebral body replacement ( ). Sole biopsies or kypho-/vertebroplasties were excluded.

Results: The inclusion criteria was met by 396 patients, of which 59 (15%) were treated with decompression ( ), 235 (59%) with posterior instrumentation ( ), and 102 (26%) with additional vertebral body replacement ( ). The main factor for selection towards instrumentation was a higher SINS score (SINS 9 in , 10 in vs. 7 in , p < 0.0001). Surgical complications occurred in 55 cases (14%), slightly more frequent following instrumentations (15% vs. 8% , p = 0.427). Reoperations were necessary in 65 cases (16%), mostly due to SSI (n = 19, 29%), local recurrence (n = 15, 23%), and hardware failure (HWF) during follow-up (n = 9, 18%, , p = 0.7853). HWF occurred significantly more frequent in cases with multisegmental metastases at the TLJ (p = 0.0002) which were treated with longer constructs (p = 0.0092). Median postoperative survival was 10 months. The occurrence of complications reduced postoperative survival drastically in all groups (p = 0.0023).

Discussion And Conclusion: In this large multicentric patient cohort with TLJ metastases, the majority of patients (85%) were treated with instrumented spine surgery. The main factor for patient selection towards instrumented surgery was a higher SINS score. Long instrumentations for multisegmental disease at the TLJ were identified with higher risk for hardware-failure during follow-up. In those patients, frequent follow-up imaging is warranted. As postoperative survival is drastically reduced by the occurrence of postoperative complications, it is imperative to carefully select the individually appropriate extent of surgery in order to avoid postoperative complications.

References

Scheufler K, Franke J, Eckardt A, Dohmen H . Accuracy of image-guided pedicle screw placement using intraoperative computed tomography-based navigation with automated referencing, part I: cervicothoracic spine. Neurosurgery. 2011; 69(4):782-95. DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e318222ae16. View

Park S, Lee C, Chung S . Surgical results of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): analysis of functional outcome, survival time, and complication. Spine J. 2015; 16(3):322-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.005. View

Versteeg A, Verlaan J, Sahgal A, Mendel E, Quraishi N, Fourney D . The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score: Impact on Oncologic Decision-Making. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016; 41 Suppl 20:S231-S237. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001822. View

Kendlbacher P, Tkatschenko D, Czabanka M, Bayerl S, Bohner G, Woitzik J . Workflow and performance of intraoperative CT, cone-beam CT, and robotic cone-beam CT for spinal navigation in 503 consecutive patients. Neurosurg Focus. 2022; 52(1):E7. DOI: 10.3171/2021.10.FOCUS21467. View

Tokuhashi Y, Uei H, Oshima M, Ajiro Y . Scoring system for prediction of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. World J Orthop. 2014; 5(3):262-71. PMC: 4095019. DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.262. View

Onken J, Fekonja L, Wehowsky R, Hubertus V, Vajkoczy P . Metastatic dissemination patterns of different primary tumors to the spine and other bones. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2019; 36(6):493-498. DOI: 10.1007/s10585-019-09987-w. View

Magill S, Edwards J, Bamberg W, Beldavs Z, Dumyati G, Kainer M . Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections. N Engl J Med. 2014; 370(13):1198-208. PMC: 4648343. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1306801. View

Fisher C, DiPaola C, Ryken T, Bilsky M, Shaffrey C, Berven S . A novel classification system for spinal instability in neoplastic disease: an evidence-based approach and expert consensus from the Spine Oncology Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35(22):E1221-9. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e16ae2. View

Margaryan D, Renz N, Bervar M, Zahn R, Onken J, Putzier M . Spinal implant-associated infections: a prospective multicentre cohort study. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2020; 56(4):106116. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.106116. View

10.

Barzilai O, Versteeg A, Sahgal A, Rhines L, Bilsky M, Sciubba D . Survival, local control, and health-related quality of life in patients with oligometastatic and polymetastatic spinal tumors: A multicenter, international study. Cancer. 2018; 125(5):770-778. PMC: 8020734. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31870. View

11.

Wagner A, Haag E, Joerger A, Jost P, Combs S, Wostrack M . Comprehensive surgical treatment strategy for spinal metastases. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):7988. PMC: 8042046. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87121-1. View

12.

Dosani M, Lucas S, Wong J, Weir L, Lomas S, Cumayas C . Impact of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score on Surgical Referral Patterns and Outcomes. Curr Oncol. 2018; 25(1):53-58. PMC: 5832277. DOI: 10.3747/co.25.3835. View

13.

Hartl R, Lam K, Wang J, Korge A, Kandziora F, Audige L . Worldwide survey on the use of navigation in spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2012; 79(1):162-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2012.03.011. View

14.

Gelalis I, Paschos N, Pakos E, Politis A, Arnaoutoglou C, Karageorgos A . Accuracy of pedicle screw placement: a systematic review of prospective in vivo studies comparing free hand, fluoroscopy guidance and navigation techniques. Eur Spine J. 2011; 21(2):247-55. PMC: 3265579. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-011-2011-3. View

15.

Bilsky M, Laufer I, Burch S . Shifting paradigms in the treatment of metastatic spine disease. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(22 Suppl):S101-7. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181bac4b2. View

16.

Polly Jr D, Chou D, Sembrano J, Ledonio C, Tomita K . An analysis of decision making and treatment in thoracolumbar metastases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(22 Suppl):S118-27. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181ba6d02. View

17.

Barzilai O, Fisher C, Bilsky M . State of the Art Treatment of Spinal Metastatic Disease. Neurosurgery. 2018; 82(6):757-769. DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyx567. View

18.

Nater A, Tetreault L, Kopjar B, Arnold P, Dekutoski M, Finkelstein J . Predictive factors of survival in a surgical series of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and complete external validation of 8 multivariate models of survival in a prospective North American multicenter study. Cancer. 2018; 124(17):3536-3550. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31585. View

19.

Choi D, Fox Z, Albert T, Arts M, Balabaud L, Bunger C . Prediction of Quality of Life and Survival After Surgery for Symptomatic Spinal Metastases: A Multicenter Cohort Study to Determine Suitability for Surgical Treatment. Neurosurgery. 2015; 77(5):698-708. DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000907. View

20.

Hecht N, Yassin H, Czabanka M, Fohre B, Arden K, Liebig T . Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017; 43(5):370-377. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002173. View