Experience in the treatment of spinal tumors complicated by compression of the spinal cord and its roots
https://doi.org/10.35401/2500-0268-2022-25-1-5-11
Abstract
Objective: Improvement of the results of treatment of vertebral tumors with neural compression by means of analyzing the authors’ experience.
Material and methods: The study included 151 patients with primary and metastatic vertebral tumors, operated in the neurosurgical departments of three large medical institutions from 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2020.
Results: Most of the patients underwent palliative interventions. Radical surgery (marginal or wide resection of the tumor) was performed in 8 (5%) patients. Surgical treatment as the only method of treatment was used in 75 (50%) cases, combined treatment was used in 42 (28%) people, complex treatment – in 34 (22%). The immediate results of treatment of 91% of patients were characterized by the absence of negative dynamics in the neurological status and in 50% of cases by positive dynamics in the functional state. Among patients with malignant tumors and a traced catamnesis, the one-year survival rate was 66%, three-year – 52%, five-year – 47%. The median overall survival rate was 12.8 months, the median event-free survival rate was 12.55 months.
Conclusion: The use of non-radical interventions in the surgery of vertebral tumors with neural compression expands the possibilities of minimizing surgical trauma, while maintaining the neurological and improving the functional status of the patient.
About the Authors
O. I. KitRussian Federation
Oleg I. Kit, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, General Director of National Medical Research Center for Oncology; Head of the Oncology Department, Rostov State Medical University; Chief Freelance Oncologist of the Southern Federal District
Rostov-on-Don
D. E. Zakondyrin
Russian Federation
Dmitry E. Zakondyrin, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Research Fellow of the Scientific Department of Emergency Neurosurgery; Neurosurgeon, Neurosurgery Department of Clinical Medical Centre
3, Bolshaya Sukharevskaya sq., Moscow, 129090
A. A. Grin
Russian Federation
Andrey A. Grin, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Scientific Department of Emergency Neurosurgery; Professor of Neurosurgery and Neuroresuscitation Department, Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry; Chief Freelance Neurosurgeon of the Moscow Healthcare Department
Moscow
E. E. Rostorguev
Russian Federation
Eduard E. Rostorguev, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Department of Neuro-oncology
Rostov-on-Don
S. V. Yundin
Russian Federation
Sergey V. Yundin, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Head of the Neurosurgery Department of Clinical Medical Centre
Moscow
References
1. Zaborovsky NS, Ptashnikov DA, Topuzov EE, et al. Spine Tumor Epidemiology in Patients who Underwent Orthopedic Surgery. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2019;25(1):104–112. https://doi.org/10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-1-104-112. (In Russ.).
2. Porhanov VA, Basankin IV, Afaunov AA, et al. Ways to optimize providing of spine healthcare in a large region of the Russian Federation. Spine Surgery. 2020;17(4):94–101. https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2020.4.94-101. (In Russ.).
3. Dreghorn CR, Newman RJ, Hardy GJ. Primary tumours of the axial skeleton. Experience of the Leeds Regional Bone Tumour Registry. Spine. 1990;15(2):137–140. PMID: 2326708. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199002000-00018
4. Кit OI, Balyazin-Parfenov IV, Balyazina EV, et al. Tumors penetrating into the cranial cavity and spinal canal. Cytological, mor phological and immunohistochemical diagnostics of tumors of the central nervous system. Novocherkassk: Lik, 2015:156. (In Russ.).
5. Musaev ER. Primary spine tumors. Literature review. Practical oncology. 2010;11(1):19–24. (In Russ.).
6. Boriani S, Weinstein JN, Biagini R. Primary bone tumors of the spine. Terminology and surgical staging. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997;22:1036–1044. PMID: 9152458. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199705010-00020
7. Deng Z, Xu B, Jin J. Strategies for Management of Spinal Metastases: A Comprehensive Review. Cancer Translational Medicine. 2015;1(3):94–100. https://doi.org/10.4103/2395-3977.159536
8. Conti A, Acker G, Kluge A. Decision Making in Patients with Metastatic Spine. The Role of Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities. Frontiers in oncology. 2019;9:915. PMID: 31608228. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00915
9. Barzilai O, Robin AM, O’Toole JE. Minimally Invasive Surgery Strategies: Changing the Treatment of Spine Tumors. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2020;31(2):201–209. PMID: 32147011. PMCID: PMC7703710. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nec.2019.11.003
10. Disch AC, Kleber C, Redemann D. Current surgical strategies for treating spinal tumors: Results of a questionnaire survey among members of the German Spine Society (DWG). Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020;46(1):89–94. PMID: 31506180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2019.08.019
11. Araujo AO, Narazaki DK, Jacobsen Teixeira WG, et al. En bloc vertebrectomy for the treatment of spinal lesions. Five years of experience in a single institution: a case series. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2018;73:e95. PMID: 29723344. PMCID: PMC5910632. https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2018/e95
12. Basankin IV, Porhanov VA, Takhmazyan KK, et al. Giant cell tumor of thoracic spine. A clinical case of efficient radical spondylectomy of three vertebral bodies. Innovative Medicine of Kuban. 2017;6(2):27–33. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Kit O.I., Zakondyrin D.E., Grin A.A., Rostorguev E.E., Yundin S.V. Experience in the treatment of spinal tumors complicated by compression of the spinal cord and its roots. Innovative Medicine of Kuban. 2022;(1):5-11. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.35401/2500-0268-2022-25-1-5-11