Treatment Approach for Bilsky Grade 2 Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Based on Radiation Therapy Failure Risk.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sehan Park, Dong-Ho Lee, Chang Ju Hwang, Gumin Jeong, Ji Uk Choi, Hyuk-Joon Sohn, San Kim, Yeon Joo Kim, Jae Hwan Cho
{"title":"Treatment Approach for Bilsky Grade 2 Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Based on Radiation Therapy Failure Risk.","authors":"Sehan Park, Dong-Ho Lee, Chang Ju Hwang, Gumin Jeong, Ji Uk Choi, Hyuk-Joon Sohn, San Kim, Yeon Joo Kim, Jae Hwan Cho","doi":"10.1177/21925682251359292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectivesThis study evaluated the outcomes of radiation therapy (RT) as the initial treatment for Bilsky grade 2 metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and identified the risk factors associated with RT failure.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled 151 patients diagnosed with Bilsky grade 2 MESCC. Patients were divided into 2 groups, viz. those who initially underwent RT (n = 127) and those treated with surgery at presentation (n = 24). The patient demographics, treatment outcomes, and risk factors for RT failure were analyzed. The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) and clinical outcomes such as ambulatory status and neurological function were compared. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of RT failure.ResultsRT was successful in 85.8% (109/127) of patients, and only 14.2% (18/127) required surgery due to symptom progression. The SINS were significantly higher in the RT-failure group (9.6 ± 3.2) than in the RT-success group (7.4 ± 2.8, <i>P</i> = 0.003). SINS scores >8 were associated with a higher risk of RT failure. Patients the surgery group were younger and presented more frequently with neurological deficits. No significant differences in final ambulatory status or survival were observed between the RT-success and RT-failure subgroups.ConclusionsRT can be a viable initial treatment option for Bilsky grade 2 MESCC in the absence of neurological deficits or severe mechanical pain. However, patients with greater spinal instability (SINS >8) face a higher risk of RT failure and may benefit from surgical intervention at diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"21925682251359292"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12245823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682251359292","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectivesThis study evaluated the outcomes of radiation therapy (RT) as the initial treatment for Bilsky grade 2 metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and identified the risk factors associated with RT failure.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study enrolled 151 patients diagnosed with Bilsky grade 2 MESCC. Patients were divided into 2 groups, viz. those who initially underwent RT (n = 127) and those treated with surgery at presentation (n = 24). The patient demographics, treatment outcomes, and risk factors for RT failure were analyzed. The Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) and clinical outcomes such as ambulatory status and neurological function were compared. Logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of RT failure.ResultsRT was successful in 85.8% (109/127) of patients, and only 14.2% (18/127) required surgery due to symptom progression. The SINS were significantly higher in the RT-failure group (9.6 ± 3.2) than in the RT-success group (7.4 ± 2.8, P = 0.003). SINS scores >8 were associated with a higher risk of RT failure. Patients the surgery group were younger and presented more frequently with neurological deficits. No significant differences in final ambulatory status or survival were observed between the RT-success and RT-failure subgroups.ConclusionsRT can be a viable initial treatment option for Bilsky grade 2 MESCC in the absence of neurological deficits or severe mechanical pain. However, patients with greater spinal instability (SINS >8) face a higher risk of RT failure and may benefit from surgical intervention at diagnosis.

基于放疗失败风险的Bilsky 2级转移性硬膜外脊髓压迫的治疗方法。
研究设计回顾性队列研究。目的本研究评估放射治疗(RT)作为Bilsky 2级转移性硬膜外脊髓压迫(MESCC)的初始治疗的结果,并确定与RT失败相关的危险因素。方法本回顾性队列研究纳入151例诊断为Bilsky 2级MESCC的患者。患者被分为两组,即最初接受RT治疗的患者(n = 127)和一开始就接受手术治疗的患者(n = 24)。分析患者人口统计学、治疗结果和RT失败的危险因素。比较脊柱不稳定肿瘤评分(SINS)和临床结果,如活动状态和神经功能。采用逻辑回归来确定预测RT失败的因素。结果放疗成功率85.8%(109/127),仅14.2%(18/127)患者因症状进展需要手术治疗。rt失败组的SINS(9.6±3.2)明显高于rt成功组(7.4±2.8,P = 0.003)。SINS评分为bb0 - 8与RT失败的高风险相关。手术组患者更年轻,更常出现神经功能障碍。在rt成功亚组和rt失败亚组之间没有观察到最终动态状态或生存的显著差异。结论srt是Bilsky 2级MESCC患者在无神经功能缺损或严重机械性疼痛的情况下可行的初始治疗方案。然而,脊柱不稳定程度较高的患者(SINS bbbb8)面临更高的RT失败风险,在诊断时可能会受益于手术干预。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信