Treatment Strategies for Intermediate Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score Patients: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY World neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123627
Bernard K Okai, Esteban Quiceno, Mohamed A R Soliman, Hendrick Francois, Asham Khan, Joanna M Roy, Hannon W Levy, Alexander O Aguirre, John Pollina, Jeffrey P Mullin
{"title":"Treatment Strategies for Intermediate Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score Patients: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Bernard K Okai, Esteban Quiceno, Mohamed A R Soliman, Hendrick Francois, Asham Khan, Joanna M Roy, Hannon W Levy, Alexander O Aguirre, John Pollina, Jeffrey P Mullin","doi":"10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) is used in determining instability in patients with spinal metastases. Intermediate scores of 7 to 12 suggest possible instability, but there are no clear guidelines to address patients with these scores.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies that included patient demographics, tumor histology, surgical or radiotherapy management, and outcomes of patients with intermediate SINS. We reported mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) to assess differences between patients managed surgically versus with radiotherapy alone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen articles, totaling 1822 patients with intermediate SINS were analyzed. In 5 studies (38.4%), the management decision was based on a tumor board review. There was no significant difference between surgical management versus radiotherapy (P = 0.24). When dichotomized into SINS 7-9 and 10-12, the OR for surgical management in the 10-12 group compared to the 7-9 group was 6.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.31-20.5, P = 0.0005). More renal cell carcinomas were managed surgically instead of with radiotherapy alone than other tumor types (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.14-3.05, P = 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall complications between the 2 treatment groups (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.49-2.54, P = 0.79). Vertebral fracture rates after any radiotherapy type ranged between 20% and 66%. The need for a surgical procedure, including stabilization, vertebroplasty, or kyphoplasty after radiotherapy ranged from 5% to 34.2%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Complication rates after surgery versus radiotherapy in the intermediate SINS category are similar, but the complication types differ. Patients in the 10-12 SINS subgroup, due to larger lytic area and higher probability of vertebral body fracture, could benefit from stabilization before radiotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":23906,"journal":{"name":"World neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"123627"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.123627","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) is used in determining instability in patients with spinal metastases. Intermediate scores of 7 to 12 suggest possible instability, but there are no clear guidelines to address patients with these scores.

Methods: We searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies that included patient demographics, tumor histology, surgical or radiotherapy management, and outcomes of patients with intermediate SINS. We reported mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) to assess differences between patients managed surgically versus with radiotherapy alone.

Results: Thirteen articles, totaling 1822 patients with intermediate SINS were analyzed. In 5 studies (38.4%), the management decision was based on a tumor board review. There was no significant difference between surgical management versus radiotherapy (P = 0.24). When dichotomized into SINS 7-9 and 10-12, the OR for surgical management in the 10-12 group compared to the 7-9 group was 6.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.31-20.5, P = 0.0005). More renal cell carcinomas were managed surgically instead of with radiotherapy alone than other tumor types (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.14-3.05, P = 0.01). There was no statistical difference in overall complications between the 2 treatment groups (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.49-2.54, P = 0.79). Vertebral fracture rates after any radiotherapy type ranged between 20% and 66%. The need for a surgical procedure, including stabilization, vertebroplasty, or kyphoplasty after radiotherapy ranged from 5% to 34.2%.

Conclusions: Complication rates after surgery versus radiotherapy in the intermediate SINS category are similar, but the complication types differ. Patients in the 10-12 SINS subgroup, due to larger lytic area and higher probability of vertebral body fracture, could benefit from stabilization before radiotherapy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中度脊柱不稳定肿瘤评分(SINS 7-12)患者的治疗策略:一项系统综述。
背景:脊柱不稳定性肿瘤评分(SINS)用于确定脊柱转移患者的不稳定性。7到12分的中间值提示可能存在不稳定性,但没有明确的指南来处理这些评分的患者。方法:我们在PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane数据库中检索了包括患者人口统计学、肿瘤组织学、手术或放疗管理以及中度SINS患者结局的研究。我们报告了平均差异和优势比(OR)来评估手术治疗与单独放疗患者之间的差异。结果:纳入13篇文献,共1822例中期SINS患者。在5项研究(38.4%)中,管理决策是基于肿瘤委员会的审查。手术治疗与放疗治疗无显著差异(p=0.24)。当分为7-9和10-12时,10-12组与7-9组相比,手术治疗的OR为6.88(95%可信区间[CI] 2.31-20.5,p=0.0005)。手术治疗肾细胞癌多于单纯放疗治疗(OR=1.87,95%CI=1.14-3.05,p=0.01)。两组总并发症比较,差异无统计学意义(OR=1.12,95%CI=0.49 ~ 2.54,p=0.79)。任何类型放疗后的椎体骨折率在20%到66%之间。放疗后需要手术治疗,包括稳定、椎体成形术或后凸成形术的比例为5%至34.2%。结论:中间型SINS手术后与放疗后并发症发生率相似,但并发症类型不同。10-12 SINS亚组患者,由于溶解面积较大,椎体骨折概率较高,在放疗前进行稳定治疗受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World neurosurgery
World neurosurgery CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
15.00%
发文量
1765
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: World Neurosurgery has an open access mirror journal World Neurosurgery: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The journal''s mission is to: -To provide a first-class international forum and a 2-way conduit for dialogue that is relevant to neurosurgeons and providers who care for neurosurgery patients. The categories of the exchanged information include clinical and basic science, as well as global information that provide social, political, educational, economic, cultural or societal insights and knowledge that are of significance and relevance to worldwide neurosurgery patient care. -To act as a primary intellectual catalyst for the stimulation of creativity, the creation of new knowledge, and the enhancement of quality neurosurgical care worldwide. -To provide a forum for communication that enriches the lives of all neurosurgeons and their colleagues; and, in so doing, enriches the lives of their patients. Topics to be addressed in World Neurosurgery include: EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, RESEARCH, POLITICS, HISTORY, CULTURE, CLINICAL SCIENCE, LABORATORY SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES, CLINICAL IMAGES, VIDEOS
期刊最新文献
Comparative Analysis of Hemorrhagic Complications in Deep Brain Stimulation: Microelectrode Recording versus Macrostimulation-Does the Technique Matter? Development and Validation of Machine Learning-Based Model for Hospital Length of Stay in Patients Undergoing Endovascular Interventional Embolization for Intracranial Aneurysms. Reduced Vertebral Hounsfield Unit Values in the Bridging Group of Ossification-Related Segments in Patients with Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament of the Cervical Spine. The Role of Neuropsychology in the Management of Spinal Cord Injury: A Comprehensive Literature Review. In Reply to the Letter to the Editor Regarding: "Intersection of Care: Navigating Patient-Hospital Relationships in Neurosurgery".
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1