When Would Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Not Be Preferable for Metastatic Spine Disease?

<h3>Background</h3> Metastatic spine tumor surgery (MSTS) is an important treatment modality of metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Open spine surgery (OSS) was previously the gold standard of treatment till the early 2010s. However, advancements in MSTS in recent years have led to the advent of minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) techniques for the treatment of MSD. The clear benefits of MISS have resulted in a current paradigm shift toward today’s gold standard of MISS and early adjuvant radiotherapy in treating MSD patients. Nonetheless, despite improvements in surgical techniques and the rise of literature supporting MISS for MSD, there are still certain situations whereby MISS is not desirable or even suitable. There has also yet to be any literature describing the considerations of not using MISS in MSD in today’s clinical context. <h3>Methods</h3> A narrative review was conducted for this manuscript. All studies related to OSS and MISS in MSTS were included. <h3>Results</h3> A total of 54 studies were included in this review. These studies discussed various advantages of MISS for MSD in today’s clinical context, including the patient profile, location of vertebrae involved with metastasis requiring treatment, tumor characteristics, as well as equipment availability. <h3>Conclusion</h3> This study establishes situations in which MISS can be less applicable despite the advantages it may confer over traditional OSS. MSTS should be individualized, depending on the experience of the surgeon. OSS is a time-tested approach that still holds weight in MSTS and should be readily utilized depending on the clinical situation. <h3>Level of Evidence</h3> 4.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The International Journal of Spine Surgery
Published
2024-11-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.14444/8658
Primary Topic
Management of metastatic bone disease
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When Would Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Not Be Preferable for Metastatic Spine Disease?

Priyambada Kumar, Jiong Hao Tan, Renick Lee, Naresh Kumar et al.
The International Journal of Spine Surgery
Management of metastatic bone disease
article

When Would Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Not Be Preferable for Metastatic Spine Disease?

Priyambada Kumar, Jiong Hao Tan, Renick Lee, Naresh Kumar, Seok Woo Kim, Si Jian Hui, Sahil Athia, Shahid Ali
article en

Abstract

<h3>Background</h3> Metastatic spine tumor surgery (MSTS) is an important treatment modality of metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Open spine surgery (OSS) was previously the gold standard of treatment till the early 2010s. However, advancements in MSTS in recent years have led to the advent of minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) techniques for the treatment of MSD. The clear benefits of MISS have resulted in a current paradigm shift toward today’s gold standard of MISS and early adjuvant radiotherapy in treating MSD patients. Nonetheless, despite improvements in surgical techniques and the rise of literature supporting MISS for MSD, there are still certain situations whereby MISS is not desirable or even suitable. There has also yet to be any literature describing the considerations of not using MISS in MSD in today’s clinical context. <h3>Methods</h3> A narrative review was conducted for this manuscript. All studies related to OSS and MISS in MSTS were included. <h3>Results</h3> A total of 54 studies were included in this review. These studies discussed various advantages of MISS for MSD in today’s clinical context, including the patient profile, location of vertebrae involved with metastasis requiring treatment, tumor characteristics, as well as equipment availability. <h3>Conclusion</h3> This study establishes situations in which MISS can be less applicable despite the advantages it may confer over traditional OSS. MSTS should be individualized, depending on the experience of the surgeon. OSS is a time-tested approach that still holds weight in MSTS and should be readily utilized depending on the clinical situation. <h3>Level of Evidence</h3> 4.

The International Journal of Spine SurgeryVol. 18(6)
King Edward Medical University (PK), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE), University Health System (US), National Capital Commission (CA), National University Health System (SG), Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital (KR)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Management of metastatic bone disease
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.