No abstract

OBJECTIVEQuality of life (QOL) is an important endpoint measure of cancer treatment. The authors’ goal was to evaluate QOL trajectories and prognostic value in cancer patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases.METHODSPatients who underwent Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) between January 2016 and November 2019 were prospectively evaluated for QOL using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire before SRS and at follow-up visits. Only patients who had pre-SRS and at least 1 post-SRS QOL assessment were considered.RESULTSFifty-four cancer patients underwent 109 GKRS procedures. The first post-SRS visit was at a median of 2.59 months (range 0.13–21.08 months), and the last post-SRS visit was at 14.72 months (range 2.52–45.21 months) after SRS. There was no statistically significant change in the EQ-5D index score (p = 0.539) at the first compared with last post-SRS visit. The proportion of patients reporting some problems on the EQ-5D dimension of self-care increased during the course of follow-up from 9% (pre-SRS visit) to 18% (last post-SRS visit; p = 0.03). The proportion of patients reporting problems on the EQ-5D dimensions of mobility, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression remained stable during the course of follow-up (p ≥ 0.106). After adjusting for clinical variables, a higher recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class (i.e., worse prognostic category) was independently associated with greater odds for EQ-5D index score deterioration (p = 0.050). Upfront whole-brain radiation therapy predicted deterioration of the EQ-5D self-care (p = 0.03) and usual activities (p = 0.024) dimensions, while a greater number of lesions predicted deterioration of the EQ-5D anxiety/depression dimension (p = 0.008). A lower pre-SRS EQ-5D index was associated with shorter survival independently from clinical and demographic variables (OR 18.956, 95% CI 2.793–128.64; p = 0.003).CONCLUSIONSQOL is largely preserved in brain metastasis patients treated with SRS. Higher RPA class, upfront whole-brain radiation therapy, and greater intracranial disease burden are independent predictors of post-SRS QOL deterioration. Worse pre-SRS QOL predicts shorter survival. Assessment of QOL is recommended in brain metastasis patients managed with SRS.

OBJECTIVEAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a safe and effective intervention to treat cervical spine pathology. Although these were originally performed as single-level procedures, multilevel ACDF has been performed for patients with extensive degenerative disc disease. To date, there is a paucity of data regarding outcomes related to ACDFs of 3 or more levels. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical outcomes of 3- and 4-level ACDF procedures.METHODSThe authors performed a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent 3- and 4-level ACDF at the University of Virginia Health System between January 2010 and December 2017. In patients meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria, demographics, fusion rates, time to fusion, and reoperation rates were evaluated. Fusion was determined by < 1 mm of change in interspinous distance between individual fused vertebrae on lateral flexion/extension radiographs and lack of radiolucency between the grafts and vertebral bodies. Any procedure requiring a surgical revision was considered a failure.RESULTSSixty-six patients (47 with 3-level and 19 with 4-level ACDFs) met the inclusion/exclusion criteria of having at least one lateral flexion/extension radiograph series ≥ 12 months after surgery. Seventy percent of 3-level patients and 68% of 4-level patients had ≥ 24 months of follow-up. Ninety-four percent of 3-level patients and 100% of 4-level patients achieved radiographic fusion for at least 1 surgical level. Eighty-eight percent and 82% of 3- and 4-level patients achieved fusion at C3–4; 85% and 89% of 3- and 4-level patients achieved fusion at C4–5; 68% and 89% of 3- and 4-level patients achieved fusion at C5–6; 44% and 42% of 3- and 4-level patients achieved fusion at C6–7; and no patients achieved fusion at C7–T1. Time to fusion was not significantly different between levels. Revision was required in 6.4% of patients with 3-level and in 16% of patients with 4-level ACDF. The mean time to revision was 46.2 and 45.4 months for 3- and 4-level ACDF, respectively. The most common reason for revision was worsening of initial symptoms.CONCLUSIONSThe authors’ experience with long-segment anterior cervical fusions shows their fusion rates exceeding most of the reported fusion rates for similar procedures in the literature, with rates similar to those reported for short-segment ACDFs. Three-level and 4-level ACDF procedures are viable options for cervical spine pathology, and the authors’ analysis demonstrates an equivalent rate of fusion and time to fusion between 3- and 4-level surgeries.

No abstract