Cargando…

The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) to open posterior stabilization (OPS) in spinal instability patients and minimal access separation surgery (MASS) to open posterior stabilization and decompression (OPSD) in metast...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kumar, Naresh, Tan, Jiong H., Thomas, Andrew C., Tan, Joel Y. H., Madhu, Sirisha, Shen, Liang, Lopez, Keith G., Hey, Dennis H. W., Liu, Gabriel, Wong, HeeKit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10556902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35227126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049803
_version_ 1785116969766223872
author Kumar, Naresh
Tan, Jiong H.
Thomas, Andrew C.
Tan, Joel Y. H.
Madhu, Sirisha
Shen, Liang
Lopez, Keith G.
Hey, Dennis H. W.
Liu, Gabriel
Wong, HeeKit
author_facet Kumar, Naresh
Tan, Jiong H.
Thomas, Andrew C.
Tan, Joel Y. H.
Madhu, Sirisha
Shen, Liang
Lopez, Keith G.
Hey, Dennis H. W.
Liu, Gabriel
Wong, HeeKit
author_sort Kumar, Naresh
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) to open posterior stabilization (OPS) in spinal instability patients and minimal access separation surgery (MASS) to open posterior stabilization and decompression (OPSD) in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) patients. METHODS: We analysed patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar metastatic spine disease (MSD) from Jan 2011 to Oct 2017. Patients were divided into minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open spine surgery (OSS) groups. Spinal instability patients were treated with PPSF/OPS with pedicle screws. MSCC patients were treated with MASS/OPSD. Outcomes measured included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, duration of hospital stay and ASIA-score improvement. Time to initiate radiotherapy and perioperative surgical/non-surgical complications was recorded. Propensity scoring adjustment analysis was utilised to address heterogenicity of histological tumour subtypes. RESULTS: Of 200 eligible patients, 61 underwent MISS and 139 underwent OSS for MSD. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between MISS and OSS groups. In the MISS group, 28 (45.9%) patients were treated for spinal instability and 33 (54.1%) patients were treated for MSCC. In the OSS group, 15 (10.8%) patients were treated for spinal instability alone and 124 (89.2%) were treated for MSCC. Patients who underwent PPSF had significantly lower blood loss (95 mL vs 564 mL; P < .001) and surgical complication rates(P < .05) with shorter length of stay approaching significance (6 vs 19 days; P = .100) when compared to the OPS group. Patients who underwent MASS had significantly lower blood loss (602 mL vs 1008 mL) and shorter length of stay (10 vs 18 days; P = .098) vs the OPSD group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the benefits of PPSF and MASS over OPS and OPSD for the treatment of MSD with spinal instability and MSCC, respectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10556902
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105569022023-10-07 The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease Kumar, Naresh Tan, Jiong H. Thomas, Andrew C. Tan, Joel Y. H. Madhu, Sirisha Shen, Liang Lopez, Keith G. Hey, Dennis H. W. Liu, Gabriel Wong, HeeKit Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) to open posterior stabilization (OPS) in spinal instability patients and minimal access separation surgery (MASS) to open posterior stabilization and decompression (OPSD) in metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) patients. METHODS: We analysed patients who underwent surgery for thoracolumbar metastatic spine disease (MSD) from Jan 2011 to Oct 2017. Patients were divided into minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) and open spine surgery (OSS) groups. Spinal instability patients were treated with PPSF/OPS with pedicle screws. MSCC patients were treated with MASS/OPSD. Outcomes measured included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, duration of hospital stay and ASIA-score improvement. Time to initiate radiotherapy and perioperative surgical/non-surgical complications was recorded. Propensity scoring adjustment analysis was utilised to address heterogenicity of histological tumour subtypes. RESULTS: Of 200 eligible patients, 61 underwent MISS and 139 underwent OSS for MSD. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between MISS and OSS groups. In the MISS group, 28 (45.9%) patients were treated for spinal instability and 33 (54.1%) patients were treated for MSCC. In the OSS group, 15 (10.8%) patients were treated for spinal instability alone and 124 (89.2%) were treated for MSCC. Patients who underwent PPSF had significantly lower blood loss (95 mL vs 564 mL; P < .001) and surgical complication rates(P < .05) with shorter length of stay approaching significance (6 vs 19 days; P = .100) when compared to the OPS group. Patients who underwent MASS had significantly lower blood loss (602 mL vs 1008 mL) and shorter length of stay (10 vs 18 days; P = .098) vs the OPSD group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the benefits of PPSF and MASS over OPS and OPSD for the treatment of MSD with spinal instability and MSCC, respectively. SAGE Publications 2022-02-28 2023-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10556902/ /pubmed/35227126 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049803 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kumar, Naresh
Tan, Jiong H.
Thomas, Andrew C.
Tan, Joel Y. H.
Madhu, Sirisha
Shen, Liang
Lopez, Keith G.
Hey, Dennis H. W.
Liu, Gabriel
Wong, HeeKit
The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title_full The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title_fullStr The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title_full_unstemmed The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title_short The Utility of ‘Minimal Access and Separation Surgery’ in the Management of Metastatic Spine Disease
title_sort utility of ‘minimal access and separation surgery’ in the management of metastatic spine disease
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10556902/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35227126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211049803
work_keys_str_mv AT kumarnaresh theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT tanjiongh theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT thomasandrewc theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT tanjoelyh theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT madhusirisha theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT shenliang theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT lopezkeithg theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT heydennishw theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT liugabriel theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT wongheekit theutilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT kumarnaresh utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT tanjiongh utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT thomasandrewc utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT tanjoelyh utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT madhusirisha utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT shenliang utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT lopezkeithg utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT heydennishw utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT liugabriel utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease
AT wongheekit utilityofminimalaccessandseparationsurgeryinthemanagementofmetastaticspinedisease