Study Design. A retrospective study of all patients with histologically confirmed breast cancer spinal metastases presenting to a single institution between May 2001 and April 2012. Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the 2014mT is more accurate than the 2005mT. Summary of Background Data. The commonly used 2005 modified Tokuhashi score (2005mT) has become more inaccurate as oncologists move toward treating tumors according to their molecular and genomic profile, rather than their tissue-of-origin. In attempts to improve the accuracy of the 2005mT, a revised score (2014mT) was published, suggesting that hormone receptor negative and triple-negative breast cancer patients be given a modified Tokuhashi histological score of 3 rather than 5. Methods. Demographic characteristics, tumor receptor status, clinical findings in relation to the primary tumor and its metastases, and actual survival time were collated. The 2005mT was compared with the 2014mT. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the influence of each parameter on survival, and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine predictive values of each score version. Results. Of the 185 patients included, 32 underwent operative treatment, while 153 were managed nonoperatively for their spinal metastases. The overall cohort had a median survival time of 24 months following the diagnosis of spinal metastases, with a 6-month survival rate of 90%. Hormone, HER2 and triple-negative receptor statuses were significant predictors of poorer survival upon multivariate analysis (P = 0.004, P = 0.007, P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively). Age, the original Tokuhashi score components, previous breast surgery for cancer, previous radiotherapy to the breast, previous radiotherapy to the spine, previous chemotherapy, and previous immunotherapy were not significant. At 6 months, the 2005mT AUROC was 0.62, while that of the 2014mT was 0.64 (P = 0.5394). Conclusion. Tumor histological subtype is crucial when prognosticating the survival of patients with breast cancer spinal metastases. Although the 2014mT was marginally more accurate than the 2005mT, its predictive ability remains poor. Level of Evidence: 3

Objectives: To review surgical management and outcomes of missed pediatric Monteggia fractures.Data Sources: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Library from inception through March 2, 2020. The keywords were "Monteggia fracture," "missed Monteggia," "neglected Monteggia," "chronic Monteggia," and "chronic radial head dislocation."Study Selection: All original human studies on missed pediatric Monteggia fractures were included. Congenital Monteggia fractures and isolated radial head dislocations were excluded. Data Extraction:The revised Methodological Index for Nonrandomised Studies tool was used to assess the quality of studies.Data Synthesis: Each patient's data were retrieved individually.The x 2 test and Fisher exact test were used to analyze the difference in outcomes for different surgical managements. Multivariate analysis was performed for variables that were significant on univariate analysis.Conclusions: Thirty studies with 600 patients were included.Proximal ulnar osteotomies (P = 0.016) and the absence of transcapitellar pinning (P = 0.001) were the most significant predictors for eventual reduction of radial head. Other surgical management variables were not significant predictors. These include open or closed reduction approach of radial head reduction; presence or absence of ulnar osteotomy; presence or absence of lengthening, angular correction, overcorrection, or bone grafting of ulnar osteotomy; type of fixation for ulnar osteotomy; presence or absence of radial osteotomy; presence or absence of annular ligament repair or reconstruction; and repair or reconstruction of annular ligament.

To review the current status of salvaged blood transfusion (SBT) in metastatic spine tumour surgery (MSTS), with regard to its safety and efficacy, contraindications, and adverse effects. We also aimed to establish that the safety and adverse event profile of SBT is comparable and at least equal to that of allogeneic blood transfusion. MEDLINE and Scopus were used to search for relevant articles, based on keywords such as “cancer surgery,” “salvaged blood,” and “circulating tumor cells.” We found 159 articles, of which 55 were relevant; 20 of those were excluded because they used other blood conservation techniques in addition to cell salvage. Five articles were manually selected from reference lists. In total, 40 articles were reviewed. There is sufficient evidence of the clinical safety of using salvaged blood in oncological surgery. SBT decreases the risk of postoperative infections and tumour recurrence. However, there are some limitations regarding its clinical applications, as it cannot be employed in cases of sepsis. In this review, we established that earlier studies supported the use of salvaged blood from a cell saver in conjunction with a leukocyte depletion filter (LDF). Furthermore, we highlight the recent emergence of sufficient evidence supporting the use of intraoperative cell salvage without an LDF in MSTS.