Scott L Zuckerman1, Ilya Laufer2, Arjun Sahgal3, Yoshiya J Yamada4, Meic H Schmidt5, Dean Chou6, John H Shin7, Naresh Kumar8, Daniel M Sciubba9. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. 2. Department of Neurological Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 5. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 6. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of San Francisco California, San Francisco, CA. 7. Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. 8. University Spine Centre, University Orthopaedics, Hand & Reconstructive Microsurgery Cluster, National University Hospital, Singapore. 9. Department of Neurological Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the techniques, indications, and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and separation surgery with subsequent radiosurgery in the treatment of patients with metastatic spine disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The utilization of MIS techniques in patients with spine metastases is a growing area within spinal oncology. Separation surgery represents a novel paradigm where radiosurgery provides long-term control after tumor is surgically separated from the neural elements. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically queried for literature reporting MIS techniques or separation surgery in patients with metastatic spine disease. PRISMA guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Of the initial 983 articles found, 29 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-five articles discussed MIS techniques and were grouped according to the primary objective: percutaneous stabilization (8), tubular retractors (4), mini-open approach (8), and thoracoscopy/endoscopy (5). The remaining 4 studies reported separation surgery. Indications were similar across all studies and included patients with instability, refractory pain, or neurologic compromise. Intraoperative variables, outcomes, and complications were similar in MIS studies compared to traditional approaches, and some MIS studies showed a statistically significant improvement in outcomes. Studies of mini-open techniques had the strongest evidence for superiority. CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence currently exists for MIS techniques and separation surgery in the treatment of metastatic spine disease. Given the early promising results, the next iteration of research should include higher-quality studies with sufficient power, and will be able to provide higher-level evidence on the outcomes of MIS approaches and separation surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the techniques, indications, and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and separation surgery with subsequent radiosurgery in the treatment of patients with metastatic spine disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The utilization of MIS techniques in patients with spine metastases is a growing area within spinal oncology. Separation surgery represents a novel paradigm where radiosurgery provides long-term control after tumor is surgically separated from the neural elements. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically queried for literature reporting MIS techniques or separation surgery in patients with metastatic spine disease. PRISMA guidelines were followed. RESULTS: Of the initial 983 articles found, 29 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-five articles discussed MIS techniques and were grouped according to the primary objective: percutaneous stabilization (8), tubular retractors (4), mini-open approach (8), and thoracoscopy/endoscopy (5). The remaining 4 studies reported separation surgery. Indications were similar across all studies and included patients with instability, refractory pain, or neurologic compromise. Intraoperative variables, outcomes, and complications were similar in MIS studies compared to traditional approaches, and some MIS studies showed a statistically significant improvement in outcomes. Studies of mini-open techniques had the strongest evidence for superiority. CONCLUSIONS: Low-quality evidence currently exists for MIS techniques and separation surgery in the treatment of metastatic spine disease. Given the early promising results, the next iteration of research should include higher-quality studies with sufficient power, and will be able to provide higher-level evidence on the outcomes of MIS approaches and separation surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
Authors: James Berenson; Robert Pflugmacher; Peter Jarzem; Jeffrey Zonder; Kenneth Schechtman; John B Tillman; Leonard Bastian; Talat Ashraf; Frank Vrionis Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Claudio E Tatsui; R Jason Stafford; Jing Li; Jonathan N Sellin; Behrang Amini; Ganesh Rao; Dima Suki; Amol J Ghia; Paul Brown; Sun-Ho Lee; Charles E Cowles; Jeffrey S Weinberg; Laurence D Rhines Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2015-07-03
Authors: Patrick D Kelly; Scott L Zuckerman; Yoshiya Yamada; Eric Lis; Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer; Ori Barzilai Journal: Neurosurg Rev Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Matthew Chin; Jael E Camacho; Ivan B Ye; Jacob J Bruckner; Alexandra E Thomson; Julio J Jauregui; Kendall Buraimoh; Daniel L Cavanaugh; Eugene Y Koh; Daniel E Gelb; Steven C Ludwig Journal: J Orthop Date: 2022-02-15
Authors: Ori Barzilai; Lily McLaughlin; Mary-Kate Amato; Anne S Reiner; Shahiba Q Ogilvie; Eric Lis; Yoshiya Yamada; Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Julio C Furlan; Jefferson R Wilson; Eric M Massicotte; Arjun Sahgal; Michael G Fehlings Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2022-01-05 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Ori Barzilai; Stefano Boriani; Charles G Fisher; Arjun Sahgal; Jorrit Jan Verlaan; Ziya L Gokaslan; Aron Lazary; Chetan Bettegowda; Laurence D Rhines; Ilya Laufer Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2019-05-08
Authors: Fabio Cofano; Matteo Monticelli; Marco Ajello; Francesco Zenga; Nicola Marengo; Giuseppe Di Perna; Roberto Altieri; Paola Cassoni; Luca Bertero; Antonio Melcarne; Fulvio Tartara; Alessandro Ducati; Diego Garbossa Journal: Cancer Control Date: 2019 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.302