Cargando…
Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: Surgical decompression and reconstruction of symptomatic spinal metastases has improved the quality of life in cancer patients. However, most data has been collected on cohorts of patients with mixed tumor histopathology. We systematically reviewed the lit...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5544163/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28811991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217710911 |
_version_ | 1783255232088637440 |
---|---|
author | Clarke, Michelle J. Molina, Camilo A. Fourney, Daryl R. Fisher, Charles G. Gokaslan, Ziya L. Schmidt, Meic H. Rhines, Laurence D. Fehlings, Michael G. Laufer, Ilya Patel, Shreyaskumar R. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Reynolds, Jeremy Chou, Dean Bettegowda, Chetan Mendel, Ehud Weber, Michael H. Sciubba, Daniel M. |
author_facet | Clarke, Michelle J. Molina, Camilo A. Fourney, Daryl R. Fisher, Charles G. Gokaslan, Ziya L. Schmidt, Meic H. Rhines, Laurence D. Fehlings, Michael G. Laufer, Ilya Patel, Shreyaskumar R. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Reynolds, Jeremy Chou, Dean Bettegowda, Chetan Mendel, Ehud Weber, Michael H. Sciubba, Daniel M. |
author_sort | Clarke, Michelle J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: Surgical decompression and reconstruction of symptomatic spinal metastases has improved the quality of life in cancer patients. However, most data has been collected on cohorts of patients with mixed tumor histopathology. We systematically reviewed the literature for prognostic factors specific to the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine. METHODS: A systemic review of the literature was conducted to answer the following questions: Question 1. Describe the survival and functional outcomes of surgery or vertebral augmentation for prostate metastases to the spine. Question 2. Determine whether overall tumor burden, Gleason score, preoperative functional markers, and hormonal naivety favor operative intervention. Question 3. Establish whether clinical outcomes vary with the evolution of operative techniques. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies met the preset inclusion criteria. All included studies were retrospective series with a level of evidence of IV. Included studies consistently showed a large effect of hormone-naivety on overall survival. Additionally, studies consistently demonstrated an improvement in motor function and the ability to maintain/regain ambulation following surgery resulting in moderate strength of recommendation. All other parameters were of insufficient or low strength. CONCLUSIONS: There is a dearth of literature regarding the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine, which represents an opportunity for future research. Based on existing evidence, it appears that the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine has consistently favorable results. While no consistent preoperative indicators favor nonoperative treatment, hormone-naivety and high Karnofsky performance scores have positive effects on survival and clinical outcomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5544163 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55441632017-08-15 Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine Clarke, Michelle J. Molina, Camilo A. Fourney, Daryl R. Fisher, Charles G. Gokaslan, Ziya L. Schmidt, Meic H. Rhines, Laurence D. Fehlings, Michael G. Laufer, Ilya Patel, Shreyaskumar R. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Reynolds, Jeremy Chou, Dean Bettegowda, Chetan Mendel, Ehud Weber, Michael H. Sciubba, Daniel M. Global Spine J Review Articles STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: Surgical decompression and reconstruction of symptomatic spinal metastases has improved the quality of life in cancer patients. However, most data has been collected on cohorts of patients with mixed tumor histopathology. We systematically reviewed the literature for prognostic factors specific to the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine. METHODS: A systemic review of the literature was conducted to answer the following questions: Question 1. Describe the survival and functional outcomes of surgery or vertebral augmentation for prostate metastases to the spine. Question 2. Determine whether overall tumor burden, Gleason score, preoperative functional markers, and hormonal naivety favor operative intervention. Question 3. Establish whether clinical outcomes vary with the evolution of operative techniques. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies met the preset inclusion criteria. All included studies were retrospective series with a level of evidence of IV. Included studies consistently showed a large effect of hormone-naivety on overall survival. Additionally, studies consistently demonstrated an improvement in motor function and the ability to maintain/regain ambulation following surgery resulting in moderate strength of recommendation. All other parameters were of insufficient or low strength. CONCLUSIONS: There is a dearth of literature regarding the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine, which represents an opportunity for future research. Based on existing evidence, it appears that the surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine has consistently favorable results. While no consistent preoperative indicators favor nonoperative treatment, hormone-naivety and high Karnofsky performance scores have positive effects on survival and clinical outcomes. SAGE Publications 2017-06-01 2017-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5544163/ /pubmed/28811991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217710911 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://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 (http://www.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 | Review Articles Clarke, Michelle J. Molina, Camilo A. Fourney, Daryl R. Fisher, Charles G. Gokaslan, Ziya L. Schmidt, Meic H. Rhines, Laurence D. Fehlings, Michael G. Laufer, Ilya Patel, Shreyaskumar R. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Reynolds, Jeremy Chou, Dean Bettegowda, Chetan Mendel, Ehud Weber, Michael H. Sciubba, Daniel M. Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title | Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title_full | Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title_fullStr | Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title_short | Systematic Review of the Outcomes of Surgical Treatment of Prostate Metastases to the Spine |
title_sort | systematic review of the outcomes of surgical treatment of prostate metastases to the spine |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5544163/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28811991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217710911 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT clarkemichellej systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT molinacamiloa systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT fourneydarylr systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT fishercharlesg systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT gokaslanziyal systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT schmidtmeich systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT rhineslaurenced systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT fehlingsmichaelg systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT lauferilya systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT patelshreyaskumarr systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT rampersaudyraja systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT reynoldsjeremy systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT choudean systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT bettegowdachetan systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT mendelehud systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT webermichaelh systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine AT sciubbadanielm systematicreviewoftheoutcomesofsurgicaltreatmentofprostatemetastasestothespine |