BACKGROUND Spine surgery is indicated for select patients with mechanical instability, pain, and/or malignant epidural spinal cord compression, with or without neurological compromise. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an option for durable local control (LC) for metastatic spine disease. OBJECTIVE To determine factors associated with LC and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients receiving postoperative stereotactic spine radiosurgery. METHODS We analyzed consecutive patients from 2013 to 2019 treated with surgical intervention followed by SBRT. Surgical interventions included laminectomy and vertebrectomy. SBRT included patients treated with 1 to 5 fractions of radiosurgery. We analyzed LC, PFS, overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS A total of 63 patients were treated with a median follow-up of 12.5 mo. Approximately 75% of patients underwent vertebrectomy and 25% underwent laminectomy. One-year cumulative incidence of local failure was 19%. LC was significantly improved for patients receiving radiosurgery ≤40 d from surgery compared to that for patients receiving radiosurgery ≥40 d from surgery, 94% vs 75%, respectively, at 1 yr (P = .03). Patients who received preoperative embolization had improved LC with 1-yr LC of 88% vs 76% for those who did not receive preoperative embolization (P = .037). Significant predictors for LC on multivariate analysis were time from surgery to radiosurgery, higher radiotherapy dose, and preoperative embolization. The 1-yr PFS and OS was 56% and 60%, respectively. CONCLUSION Postoperative radiosurgery has excellent and durable LC for spine metastasis. An important consideration when planning postoperative radiosurgery is minimizing delay from surgery to radiosurgery. Preoperative embolization and higher radiotherapy dose were associated with improved LC warranting further study.

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVEThe aim of this study was to identify trends in medical malpractice litigation related to intraoperative neuromonitoring.METHODSThe Westlaw Edge legal research service was queried for malpractice litigation related to neuromonitoring in spine surgery. Cases were reviewed to determine if the plaintiff’s assertion of negligence was due to either failure to use neuromonitoring or negligent monitoring. Comparative statistics and a detailed qualitative analysis of the resulting cases were performed.RESULTSTwenty-six cases related to neuromonitoring were identified. Spinal fusion was the procedure in question in all cases, and defendants were nearly evenly divided between orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons. Defense verdicts were most common (54%), followed by settlements (27%) and plaintiff verdicts (19%). Settlements resulted in a mean $7,575,000 damage award, while plaintiff verdicts resulted in a mean $4,180,213 damage award. The basis for litigation was failure to monitor in 54% of the cases and negligent monitoring in 46%. There were no significant differences in case outcomes between the two allegations of negligence.CONCLUSIONSThe use and interpretation of intraoperative neuromonitoring findings can be the basis for a medical malpractice litigation. Spine surgeons can face malpractice risks by not monitoring when required by the standard of care and by interpreting or reacting to neuromonitoring findings inappropriately.