Cargando…

Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease

Purpose Pseudarthrosis within the spine tumor population is increased from perioperative radiation and complex stabilization for invasive and recurrent pathology. We report the radiographic and clinical rates of pseudarthrosis following multiple courses of instrumented fusion and perioperative stere...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Michael, Appelboom, Geoff, Ratliff, John K, Soltys, Scott G, Adler, John R., Park, Jon, Chang, Steven D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6349573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705790
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3631
_version_ 1783390282677485568
author Zhang, Michael
Appelboom, Geoff
Ratliff, John K
Soltys, Scott G
Adler, John R.
Park, Jon
Chang, Steven D.
author_facet Zhang, Michael
Appelboom, Geoff
Ratliff, John K
Soltys, Scott G
Adler, John R.
Park, Jon
Chang, Steven D.
author_sort Zhang, Michael
collection PubMed
description Purpose Pseudarthrosis within the spine tumor population is increased from perioperative radiation and complex stabilization for invasive and recurrent pathology. We report the radiographic and clinical rates of pseudarthrosis following multiple courses of instrumented fusion and perioperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Methods We performed a single institution review of 418 patients treated with non-isocentric SRS for spine between October 2002 and January 2013, identifying those with spinal instrumentation and greater than six months of follow-up. Surgical history, radiation planning, and radiographic outcomes were documented. Results Eleven patients who met criteria for inclusion underwent 21 sessions of spinal SRS and 16 instrumented operations. Radiographic follow-up was 48.9 months; 3/11 (27%) were with radiographic hardware failure, and one (9%) separate case ultimately warranted externalization due to tumor recurrence. SRS was administered to treat progression of disease in 12/21 (57%) procedures, and residual lesions in 7/11 (64%) procedures. Following first and second SRS, 8/11 (73%) and 2/7 (29%) patients were with symptomatic improvement, respectively. Conclusion Risk of pseudarthrosis following SRS for patients with oncologic spinal lesions will become increasingly apparent with the optimized management of and survival from spinal pathologies. We highlight how the need for local control outpaces the risk of instrumentation failure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6349573
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63495732019-01-31 Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease Zhang, Michael Appelboom, Geoff Ratliff, John K Soltys, Scott G Adler, John R. Park, Jon Chang, Steven D. Cureus Radiation Oncology Purpose Pseudarthrosis within the spine tumor population is increased from perioperative radiation and complex stabilization for invasive and recurrent pathology. We report the radiographic and clinical rates of pseudarthrosis following multiple courses of instrumented fusion and perioperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Methods We performed a single institution review of 418 patients treated with non-isocentric SRS for spine between October 2002 and January 2013, identifying those with spinal instrumentation and greater than six months of follow-up. Surgical history, radiation planning, and radiographic outcomes were documented. Results Eleven patients who met criteria for inclusion underwent 21 sessions of spinal SRS and 16 instrumented operations. Radiographic follow-up was 48.9 months; 3/11 (27%) were with radiographic hardware failure, and one (9%) separate case ultimately warranted externalization due to tumor recurrence. SRS was administered to treat progression of disease in 12/21 (57%) procedures, and residual lesions in 7/11 (64%) procedures. Following first and second SRS, 8/11 (73%) and 2/7 (29%) patients were with symptomatic improvement, respectively. Conclusion Risk of pseudarthrosis following SRS for patients with oncologic spinal lesions will become increasingly apparent with the optimized management of and survival from spinal pathologies. We highlight how the need for local control outpaces the risk of instrumentation failure. Cureus 2018-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6349573/ /pubmed/30705790 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3631 Text en Copyright © 2018, Zhang et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology
Zhang, Michael
Appelboom, Geoff
Ratliff, John K
Soltys, Scott G
Adler, John R.
Park, Jon
Chang, Steven D.
Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title_full Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title_fullStr Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title_full_unstemmed Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title_short Radiographic Rate and Clinical Impact of Pseudarthrosis in Spine Radiosurgery for Metastatic Spinal Disease
title_sort radiographic rate and clinical impact of pseudarthrosis in spine radiosurgery for metastatic spinal disease
topic Radiation Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6349573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705790
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.3631
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangmichael radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT appelboomgeoff radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT ratliffjohnk radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT soltysscottg radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT adlerjohnr radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT parkjon radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease
AT changstevend radiographicrateandclinicalimpactofpseudarthrosisinspineradiosurgeryformetastaticspinaldisease