Elsevier

World Neurosurgery

Volume 83, Issue 6, June 2015, Pages 1066-1073
World Neurosurgery

Peer-Review Report
Comparison of the Therapeutic Efficacy of Surgery with or without Adjuvant Radiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone for Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: A Meta-Analysis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2014.12.039Get rights and content

Background

Spinal metastases are 20 times more common than primary spinal tumors and often cause metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). Clinical manifestations (e.g., pain and neurologic dysfunction) adversely affect patients' quality of life. Radiotherapy (RT), chemotherapy, and surgery are the major therapeutic strategies for MSCC. There is some evidence that combining surgery with adjuvant RT may be a better option.

Methods

This meta-analysis compared the therapeutic efficacy of surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) with RT alone in treatment of MSCC. Comparative studies of surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) versus RT alone for the treatment of MSCC were retrieved from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Primary (1-year survival) and secondary (motor function and complications) outcomes were compared by meta-analysis.

Results

Of the 26 studies originally identified, 20 were excluded (not original research, lack of relevance, no group comparison, or lack of comparable data). Compared with RT alone, surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) was associated with improvement of ambulation (odds ratio = 1.74, 95% confidence interval = 1.35–2.25, P < 0.05), pain relief (odds ratio = 3.61, 95% confidence interval = 2.75–4.74, P < 0.05), and 1-year survival (odds ratio = 1.92; 95% confidence interval = 1.37–2.71, P < 0.01). No differences in regaining walking ability and substantially longer hospital stays were observed. Surgery showed better therapeutic efficacy than RT alone with regard to quality of life and life expectancy, without additional complications.

Conclusions

Further studies are needed to investigate the effects of these interventions on quality of life and to identify the best therapeutic strategy for patients with MSCC.

Introduction

Spinal metastases represent the most common malignancy of the spine (3), with an incidence that is 20 times higher than primary spinal tumors. Nearly half of all solid tumors are likely to metastasize to bone, and the spine is the most commonly targeted site for such metastasis (11). The incidence of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) has increased over the years, likely as a result of longer survival of patients with cancer secondary to improved treatments for primary tumors and metastases (15). For patients with spinal metastasis, metastatic spinal cord compression is a catastrophic complication that can lead to pain, fractures, severe neurologic dysfunction, and impaired quality of life 6, 9, 26. Life expectancy for most patients with MSCC is usually limited to a few months but can vary from a few weeks to several years 16, 28.

At the present time, there are 3 major options for the management of spinal metastasis and MSCC: chemotherapy, radiotherapy (RT), and surgery. The main aim of treatment is to achieve maximal improvement of the patient's quality of life. Although pain relief and preservation of function are the primary aims of therapeutic intervention, the choice of treatment modality needs to be tailored to the expected survival. Surgical intervention has several advantages, including the immediate alleviation of pain, improvement or preservation of neural function, and restoration of the integrity of the spinal structure. However, resection of a spinal metastatic tumor is a palliative treatment only because it is very difficult to achieve disease-free survival. The decision to perform surgery in patients with MSCC requires additional considerations, including previous diagnosis of cancer or remote cancer, unstable spine or bony cord compression, inability to receive further irradiation, radioresistant tumor, and solitary metastasis (1).

Clinical studies and therapeutic guidelines have suggested that surgery could be considered for patients with a life expectancy of >6 months, concurrent with the following conditions: 1) progressive neural impairment induced by vertebral body collapse, with satisfactory recovery not achieved by decompression treatment; 2) severe pain not responsive to conservative treatment, which may be due to instability of the spine or erosion and compression of the surrounding tissues, spinal nerve, cord, and cauda equina by the tumor; 3) spinal instability secondary to destruction of the spine or associated structures or pathologic fracture, which results in the loss of all or part of the spine's supportive function; and 4) metastatic tumor limited to a single vertebra or multiple adjacent vertebrae. In addition, pathologic diagnosis is required.

Major surgical treatment of spinal metastases in patients with MSCC generally is not indicated if the patient is expected to survive <3 months (25). For these patients, a single-fraction RT schedule is recommended because several studies have reported that single-fraction and multiple-fraction RT provide similar levels of palliation for painful bone metastases 4, 7, 10, 20, 23. The decision-making process regarding selection of the treatment option should include consideration of the benefits and complications of each treatment modality, based on the results of valid clinical studies that were not biased by selection.

External RT has been found to have similar therapeutic effects as surgery 17, 18, 19. Consequently, RT is considered by many clinicians as a primary therapeutic option for patients with spinal metastasis and MSCC, especially for patients with solitary metastases and an absence of spinal instability or neurologic impairment. One potential advantage of RT is that studies of surgical intervention for spinal metastases have reported complication rates of 20%–30%, whereas serious complications related to palliative RT have not been reported.

RT alone without surgery seems to be the most common and appropriate treatment for MSCC. However, a randomized trial suggested that decompressive spinal surgery followed by RT has beneficial effects with regard to functional outcome and survival (14). Other investigators also suggested that surgery in combination with adjuvant RT may be superior to RT alone for the treatment of spinal metastases 8, 21. However, high-quality clinical evidence in support of this view is lacking, necessitating a more systematic analysis of the available published data. For this purpose, we undertook a meta-analysis to compare surgery with or without adjuvant RT versus RT alone with regard to their effects on several major indicators of therapeutic outcome (survival, motor function, and complications) in patients with MSCC.

Section snippets

Search Strategy

The databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify articles, published between 1980 and the current year (inclusive), that evaluated the use of surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) and RT alone for the treatment of patients with spinal metastasis and MSCC. The following search terms were used: “spinal metastasis,” “metastatic spinal cord compression,” “spinal cord compression,” “radiotherapy,” “radio-chemotherapy,” “surgery,” and “survival.”

Search Results

After a systematic search in the selected databases, 348 studies were identified. Another 42 articles were found via other sources. After a careful review of the title and key words of each study, 272 articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. With regard to the remaining 26 publications, 20 of them were discarded because of time overlapping, single-arm design, no MSCC, no available data, and other reasons (Figure 1). Finally, 6 studies 5, 12, 14, 18, 27, 28 were included

Discussion

The present meta-analysis was designed to compare the benefits of surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) with the benefits of RT alone in patients with MSCC. Compared with RT alone, treatment of MSCC with surgery (with or without RT) was associated with improved ambulation and pain control and increase in 1-year survival, but no difference in regain of walking ability, short-term survival, and extended hospital stay. However, although sensitivity analysis revealed that ambulation, pain relief,

Conclusions

The present meta-analysis demonstrated that compared with RT alone, treatment of MSCC with surgery (with or without adjuvant RT) was associated with improved ambulation and pain relief and increase in 1-year survival, with no differences in regain of walking ability, longer hospital stays, and significantly higher incidence of complications. However, these findings should be carefully considered because of a paucity of data and well-designed randomized controlled trials. Further large-scale

References (28)

  • D. Choi et al.

    Review of metastatic spine tumour classification and indications for surgery: the consensus statement of the Global Spine Tumour Study Group

    Eur Spine J

    (2010)
  • E. Chow et al.

    Palliative radiotherapy trials for bone metastases: a systematic review

    J Clin Oncol

    (2007)
  • A. Falavigna et al.

    Metastatic tumor of thoracic and lumbar spine: prospective study comparing the surgery and radiotherapy vs external immobilization with radiotherapy

    Arq Neuropsiquiatr

    (2007)
  • A. Falicov et al.

    Impact of surgical intervention on quality of life in patients with spinal metastases

    Spine (Phila Pa 1976)

    (2006)
  • Cited by (15)

    • Minimal invasive fixation following with radiotherapy for radiosensitive unstable metastatic spine

      2022, Biomedical Journal
      Citation Excerpt :

      Moreover, Rades et al. [27] claimed no significant difference in motor function improvement between patients receiving radiotherapy alone and those receiving surgery plus radiotherapy. However, for MSCC of unfavorable primary tumors, a 2015 meta-analysis showed better therapeutic efficacy with surgery than with radiotherapy alone with regard to pain relief, improvement of ambulation, and life expectancy without additional complications [31]. Advancements in surgical technique and technology have made MIS a feasible option for patients with spinal metastasis.

    • Prognostic and predictive role of bone metastasis in NSCLC: risk factors and clinical implications

      2022, Unraveling the Complexities of Metastasis: Transition from a Segmented View to a Conceptual Continuum
    • Loss of Local Tumor Control After Index Surgery for Spinal Metastases: A Prospective Cohort Study

      2018, World Neurosurgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Surgery for spinal metastases is effective in the management of patients with cancer when their quality of life is threatened by pathologic vertebral fracture or spinal cord compression.1-5

    • Impact of Symptomatic Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression on Survival of Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

      2017, World Neurosurgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      Such neurologic complications can affect functional independence and are one of the main determinants of the quality of life in patients with MSCC.10,13-15 A recent systematic review16 and a meta-analysis17 showed that the main therapeutic modalities used alone or in combination for MSCC treatment were radiotherapy (RT), surgery, and corticosteroids and that surgery had better therapeutic efficacy regarding life expectancy and quality of life. Numerous studies have indicated that MSCC secondary to NSCLC is associated with poorer outcomes in patients with cancer compared with the most common human cancers such as breast and prostate.5,18,19

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Conflict of interest statement: This work was supported by the Public Welfare Research Project of the Science and Technology Department in Zhejiang Province (Grant No. 2011C23086).

    View full text