Introducing the New Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology Questionnaire

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been hypothesized that a discrepancy between pretreatment expectations and perceived outcomes is a significant source of patient dissatisfaction. Currently, there is lack in understanding and tools to assess patient expectations regarding the outcomes of treatment for spinal metastases. The objective of this study was therefore to develop a patient expectations questionnaire regarding the outcomes after surgery and/or radiotherapy for spinal metastases. METHODS: A multiphase international qualitative study was conducted. Phase 1 of the study included semistructured interviews with patients and relatives to understand their expectations of the outcomes of treatment. In addition, physicians were interviewed about their communication practices with patients regarding treatment and expected outcomes. In phase 2, items were developed based on the results of the interviews in phase 1. In phase 3, patients were interviewed to validate the content and language of the questionnaire. Selection of the final items was based on feedback from patients regarding content, language, and relevance. RESULTS: In phase 1, 24 patients and 22 physicians were included. A total of 34 items were developed for the preliminary questionnaire. After phase 3, a total of 22 items were retained for the final version of the questionnaire. The questionnaire is divided into 3 sections: (1) patient expectations regarding treatment outcomes, (2) prognosis, and (3) consultation with the physician. The items cover expectations related to pain, analgesia requirements, daily and physical function, overall quality of life, life expectancy, and information provided by the physician. CONCLUSION: The new Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology questionnaire was developed to evaluate patient expectations regarding the outcomes after treatment for spinal metastases. The Patient Expectations in Spine Oncology questionnaire will allow physicians to systematically assess patient expectations of planned treatment and thus help guide patients toward realistic expectations of treatment outcome

Pattern of neurological recovery in persons with an acute cervical spinal cord injury over the first 14 days post injury

IntroductionFollowing a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) it is critical to document the level and severity of injury. Neurological recovery occurs dynamically after injury and a baseline neurological exam offers a snapshot of the patient's impairment at that time. Understanding when this exam occurs in the recovery process is crucial for discussing prognosis and acute clinical trial enrollment. The objectives of this study were to: (1) describe the trajectory of motor recovery in persons with acute cervical SCI in the first 14 days post-injury; and (2) evaluate if the timing of the baseline neurological assessment in the first 14 days impacts the amount of motor recovery observed.MethodsData were obtained from the Rick Hansen Spinal Cord Injury Registry (RHSCIR) site in Vancouver and additional neurological data was extracted from medical charts. Participants with a cervical injury (C1–T1) who had a minimum of three exams (including a baseline and discharge exam) were included. Data on the upper-extremity motor score (UEMS), total motor score (TMS) and American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) were included. A linear mixed-effect model with additional variables (AIS, level of injury, UEMS, time, time2, and TMS) was used to explore the pattern and amount of motor recovery over time.ResultsTrajectories of motor recovery in the first 14 days post-injury showed significant improvements in both TMS and UEMS for participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries, but was not different for high (C1–4) vs. low (C5–T1) cervical injuries or AIS A injuries. The timing of the baseline neurological examination significantly impacted the amount of motor recovery in participants with AIS B, C, and D injuries.DiscussionTiming of baseline neurological exams was significantly associated with the amount of motor recovery in cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries. Studies examining changes in neurological recovery should consider stratifying by severity and timing of the baseline exam to reduce bias amongst study cohorts. Future studies should validate these estimates for cervical AIS B, C, and D injuries to see if they can serve as an “adjustment factor” to control for differences in the timing of the baseline neurological exam

Supplemental Tables

Supplementary Tables e1-

Data from: Empirical targets for acute hemodynamic management of individuals with spinal cord injury

Objective: To determine the hemodynamic conditions associated with optimal neurological improvement in acute traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) individuals who had lumbar intrathecal catheters placed to measure cerebrospinal fluid pressure (CSFP). Methods: Ninety-two acute SCI individuals were enrolled in this multi-center prospective observational clinical trial. We monitored mean arterial pressure (MAP) and CSFP during the first week post-injury, and assessed neurologic function at baseline and six-months post-injury. We used relative risk iterations to determine transition points at which the likelihood of either improving neurologically or remaining unchanged neurologically was equivalent. These transition points guided our analyses where we examined the linear relationships between time spent within target hemodynamic ranges (i.e., clinical adherence) and neurological recovery. Results: Relative risk transition points for CSFP, MAP, and spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) were linearly associated with neurological improvement and directed the identification of key hemodynamic target ranges. Clinical adherence to the target ranges was positively and linearly related to improved neurological outcomes. Adherence to SCPP targets, not MAP targets, was the best indicator of improved neurological recovery, which occurred with SCPP targets of 60-65 mmHg. Failing to maintain the SCPP within the target ranges was an important detrimental factor in neurologic recovery, particularly if the target range is set lower. Conclusion: We provide an empirical, data-driven approach to aid institutions in setting hemodynamic management targets that accept the real-life challenges of adherence to specific targets. Our results provide a framework to guide the development of widespread institutional management guidelines for acute traumatic SCI

Current treatment strategy for newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum: results of an international survey

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to investigate the spectrum of current treatment protocols for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum. METHODS A survey on the treatment of spinal chordoma was distributed electronically to members of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor, including neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and radiation oncologists from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Survey participants were pre-identified clinicians from centers with expertise in the treatment of spinal tumors. The suvey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS Thirty-nine of 43 (91%) participants completed the survey. Most (80%) indicated that they favor en bloc resection without preoperative neoadjuvant radiation therapy (RT) when en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity. The main area of disagreement was with the role of postoperative RT, where 41% preferred giving RT only if positive margins were achieved and 38% preferred giving RT irrespective of margin status. When en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity, 33% preferred planned intralesional resection followed by RT, and 33% preferred giving neoadjuvant RT prior to surgery. In total, 8 treatment protocols were identified: 3 in which en bloc resection is feasible with acceptable morbidity and 5 in which en bloc resection would result in significant morbidity. CONCLUSIONS The results confirm that there is treatment variability across centers worldwide for managing newly diagnosed chordoma of the mobile spine and sacrum. This information will be used to design an international prospective cohort study to determine the most appropriate treatment strategy for patients with spinal chordoma

Feasibility of achieving planned surgical margins in primary spine tumor: a PTRON study

OBJECTIVE Oncological resection of primary spine tumors is associated with lower recurrence rates. However, even in the most experienced hands, the execution of a meticulously drafted plan sometimes fails. The objectives of this study were to determine how successful surgical teams are at achieving planned surgical margins and how successful surgeons are in intraoperatively assessing tumor margins. The secondary objective was to identify factors associated with successful execution of planned resection. METHODS The Primary Tumor Research and Outcomes Network (PTRON) is a multicenter international prospective registry for the management of primary tumors of the spine. Using this registry, the authors compared 1) the planned surgical margin and 2) the intraoperative assessment of the margin by the surgeon with the postoperative assessment of the margin by the pathologist. Univariate analysis was used to assess whether factors such as histology, size, location, previous radiotherapy, and revision surgery were associated with successful execution of the planned margins. RESULTS Three hundred patients were included. The surgical plan was successfully achieved in 224 (74.7%) patients. The surgeon correctly assessed the intraoperative margins, as reported in the final assessment by the pathologist, in 239 (79.7%) patients. On univariate analysis, no factor had a statistically significant influence on successful achievement OBJECTIVE Oncological resection of primary spine tumors is associated with lower recurrence rates. However, even in the most experienced hands, the execution of a meticulously drafted plan sometimes fails. The objectives of this study were to determine how successful surgical teams are at achieving planned surgical margins and how successful surgeons are in intraoperatively assessing tumor margins. The secondary objective was to identify factors associated with successful execution of planned resection. METHODS The Primary Tumor Research and Outcomes Network (PTRON) is a multicenter international prospective registry for the management of primary tumors of the spine. Using this registry, the authors compared 1) the planned surgical margin and 2) the intraoperative assessment of the margin by the surgeon with the postoperative assessment of the margin by the pathologist. Univariate analysis was used to assess whether factors such as histology, size, location, previous radiotherapy, and revision surgery were associated with successful execution of the planned margins. RESULTS Three hundred patients were included. The surgical plan was successfully achieved in 224 (74.7%) patients. The surgeon correctly assessed the intraoperative margins, as reported in the final assessment by the pathologist, in 239 (79.7%) patients. On univariate analysis, no factor had a statistically significant influence on successful achievement of planned margins. CONCLUSIONS In high-volume cancer centers around the world, planned surgical margins can be achieved in approximately 75% of cases. The morbidity of the proposed intervention must be balanced with the expected success rate in order to optimize patient management and surgical decision-making

Systemic considerations for the surgical treatment of spinal metastatic disease: a scoping literature review.

Systemic assessment is a pillar in the neurological, oncological, mechanical, and systemic (NOMS) decision-making framework for the treatment of patients with spinal metastatic disease. Despite this importance, emerging evidence relating systemic considerations to clinical outcomes following surgery for spinal metastatic disease has not been comprehensively summarised. We aimed to conduct a scoping literature review of this broad topic. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases from Jan 1, 2000, to July 31, 2021. 61 articles were included, accounting for a total of 22 335 patients. Preoperative systemic variables negatively associated with postoperative clinical outcomes included demographics (eg, older age [>60 years], Black race, male sex, low or elevated body-mass index, and smoking status), medical comorbidities (eg, cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, renal, endocrine, vascular, and rheumatological), biochemical abnormalities (eg, hypoalbuminaemia, atypical blood cell counts, and elevated C-reactive protein concentration), low muscle mass, generalised motor weakness (American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale grade and Frankel grade) and poor ambulation, reduced performance status, and systemic disease burden. This is the first comprehensive scoping review to broadly summarise emerging evidence relevant to the systemic assessment component of the widely used NOMS framework for spinal metastatic disease decision making. Medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists can consider these findings when prognosticating spinal metastatic disease-related surgical outcomes on the basis of patients' systemic condition. These factors might inform a shared decision-making approach with patients and their families