Frontline Voice: AO Spine Member Survey Regarding Spine Oncology Knowledge Generation and Translation Needs.

Abstract

Study design: cross-sectional survey.

Objectives: To evaluate AO Spine members' practices and comfort in managing metastatic and primary spine tumors, explore the use of decision-support and patient assessment tools, and identify knowledge gaps and future needs in spine oncology.

Methods: An online survey was distributed to AO Spine members to query comfort levels with key decisions in spinal oncology management, utilization of decision frameworks and spine oncology-specific instruments, and educational material preferences.

Results: Responses were obtained from 381 members across 82 countries. Most respondents were orthopedic spine surgeons (62%) or neurosurgeons (36%), with 42% performing 100-200 spine surgeries per year. Extradural primary and metastatic tumors were managed by 84% and 95% of respondents, respectively, with survival and frailty assessment tools used for both. While most surgeons felt comfortable determining when emergency surgery was needed (81% for primary and 82% for metastatic tumors), nuanced decisions about surgical timing were more challenging. Surgeons also noted challenges in tailoring the oncologic surgical plan to what the patient could safely tolerate. There was a strong desire for guidelines on tumor-related spinal pain (85%), treatment timing (85%), stabilization (85%), and glucocorticoid use for symptomatic extradural metastatic tumors (77%). Interest was high for classification systems for spine tumor pain (65%) and stabilization decisions (80%).

Conclusions: Additional support is needed in decision-making regarding surgical timing, patient selection, and tailoring treatment invasiveness to life expectancy and frailty. Surgeons seek further guidance to prevent neurologic deterioration and optimize recovery. Guidelines and classification systems were highly coveted for daily practice.