Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21629164›Full record

SynthesisSpine2012

Clinical outcome of metastatic spinal cord compression treated with surgical excision ± radiation versus radiation therapy alone: a systematic review of literature.

Jaehon M Kim, Elena Losina, Christopher M Bono, Andrew J Schoenfeld, Jamie E Collins, Jeffrey N Katz, Mitchel B Harris

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Spine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prognostic factors and outcomes of surgical intervention for patients with spinal metastases secondary to lung cancer: an update systematic review and meta analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jaehon M KimDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Elena Losina
Christopher M Bono
Andrew J Schoenfeld
Jamie E Collins
Jeffrey N Katz
Mitchel B Harris
Harvard University · USBoston University · US

Funding

Trial of risk mangement for prevention of accelerated atherosclerosis in SLEP60AR047782 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KARLSON, ELIZABETH W · 2001 to 2016
$18.8M
Patient Oriented Research and Mentoring Program in OrthopedicsK24AR057827 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI LOSINA, ELENA · 2010 to 2019
$1.7M
NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR057827NIAMS NIH HHS P60 AR47782
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designSystematic literature review from 1970 to 2007.

objectiveThis study reports the results of a systematic review comparing surgical decompression ± radiation to radiation therapy alone among patients with metastatic spinal cord compression. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Currently, the optimal treatment of metastatic spine lesions is not well defined and is inconsistent. Radiation and surgical excision are both accepted and effective. There appears to be a favorable trend for improved neurological outcome with surgical excision and stabilization as part of the management.

methodsA review of the English literature from 1970 to 2007 was performed in the Medline database using general MeSH terms. Relevant outcome studies for the treatment of metastatic spinal cord compression were selected through criteria defined a priori. The primary outcome was ambulatory capacity. A random effects model was built to compare results between treatment groups, based on calculated proportions from each study.

resultsOf the 1595 articles screened, 33 studies (2495 patients) were selected based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Sixty-four percent of the patients who underwent surgical decompression, tumor excision, and stabilization had neurological improvement from nonambulatory to ambulatory status. Twenty-nine percent of the radiation therapy group regained the ability to ambulate after treatment (P < 0.001). Paraplegic patients had a 4-fold greater recovery rate to functional ambulation with surgical intervention than with radiation therapy alone (42% vs. 10%, P < 0.001). Pain relief was noted in 88% of the patients in the surgical studies and in 74% of the patients in studies of radiation therapy (P < 0.001). The overall surgical complication rate was 29%.

conclusionThis systematic review suggests that surgical excision of tumor and instrumented stabilization may improve clinical outcomes compared with radiation therapy alone, with regard to neurological function and pain. However, most data in the current literature are from observational studies, where variations in patient population and treatments cannot be controlled. This compromised our ability to compare the results of both treatments directly.

Indexed as

Decompression, SurgicalRadiotherapy, AdjuvantFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecovery of FunctionSpinal CordSpinal Cord CompressionSpinal NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeWalking

Identifiers

PMID21629164
PMCPMC3876411
OpenAlexW1993630128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.