Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 323 items for :

  • "spine tumor" x
Clear All
Restricted access

Hannah M. Carl, A. Karim Ahmed, Nancy Abu-Bonsrah, Rafael De la Garza Ramos, Eric W. Sankey, Zachary Pennington, Ali Bydon, Timothy F. Witham, Jean-Paul Wolinsky, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Justin M. Sacks, C. Rory Goodwin and Daniel M. Sciubba

morbidity and mortality. 15 , 19 , 33 These include wound infections, wound dehiscence, hematomas, neurological impairments, deep venous thrombosis, and instrumentation failure, among others. 15 , 33 In patients with metastatic spine tumors, overall complication rates range between 19% and 28%, 30 , 33 , 34 whereas the incidence of surgical site infection and wound breakdown is 4%–20%. 8 , 20 , 23 , 26 Crucially, the most common reason for reoperation after the resection of spinal metastases is surgical site infection, which commonly leads to wound breakdown. 26

Free access

Albert P. Wong, Rishi R. Lall, Nader S. Dahdaleh, Cort D. Lawton, Zachary A. Smith, Ricky H. Wong, Michael J. Harvey, Sandi Lam, Tyler R. Koski and Richard G. Fessler

I ntradural-extramedullary (ID-EM) spine tumors are rare, occurring in 5 to 10 per 100,000 people. 12 , 25 , 31 The most common ID-EM tumors include meningio-mas, schwannomas, and neurofibromas. 32 Although IDEM tumors are usually benign, they may be associated with progressive pain or neurological deficit. Cervical or thoracic tumors may present with neck or upper back pain, radicular symptoms, or myelopathy. Tumors of the lumbar region may present with low-back pain, leg pain, lower-extremity weakness, or bowel or bladder dysfunction. 32 Symptomatic

Restricted access

Ilya Laufer and Mark H. Bilsky

T he lives of cancer patients are significantly impacted by spine metastases, which often result in severe pain and neurological disability. Four of the major treatment goals for spine tumors are globally applicable to all spine disorders: achieving pain control, restoration or maintenance of neurological function, spinal stability, and improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Added to these treatment considerations is the oncology-specific goal of achieving local tumor control. Although the treatment of spine metastases remains palliative, the new

Free access

Nathan T. Zwagerman, Michael M. McDowell, Ronald L. Hamilton, Edward A. Monaco III, John C. Flickinger and Peter C. Gerszten

A s our therapeutic acumen in the treatment of neoplastic diseases increases, there has been an inadvertent effect resulting in a growing number of patients living in the context of both primary and metastatic disease. A large fraction of patients with a malignant neoplasm may face metastasis to the spine alone, manifesting in over 150,000 new diagnoses of spinal metastases and primary spine tumors annually. 2 , 3 , 7 , 11 , 12 Aggressive interventions in patients with active oncological processes are often associated with high risk, and for this reason

Restricted access

Camilo A. Molina, Rachel Sarabia-Estrada, Ziya L. Gokaslan, Timothy F. Witham, Ali Bydon, Jean-Paul Wolinsky and Daniel M. Sciubba

. 17 , 56 In contrast, other studies have suggested that rhBMPs may actually be antioncogenic. 1 , 18 , 25 , 49 , 51 Given that cancer patients undergoing spine surgery might benefit from the fusion-promoting properties of rhBMPs, additional evidence is required to clarify what effects these proteins may have when placed adjacent to a spine tumor. Thus, we investigated what effect the local addition of rhBMP-2 has on tumor progression in an intraosseous spine tumor rat model. Based on previous in vitro studies suggesting that BMPs may actually slow the growth of

Restricted access

Terri S. Armstrong, Ibrahima Gning, Tito R. Mendoza, Elizabeth Vera-Bolanos, Mark R. Gilbert, Laurence D. Rhines, Jeffrey S. Weinberg, Gisela Sanchez-Williams, Victor Levin, Allen W. Burton and Charles Cleeland

Patients seldom report only a single symptom. In fact, symptoms are recognized to occur concurrently in clusters, to be multiplicative, or to act as catalysts for the occurrence of other symptoms. Symptoms also cause a burden by impacting a patient's mood, work, interactions with others, and ability to walk and care for the self. 7 Therefore, it is important to evaluate symptoms concurrently and from the patient's perspective. Although spine tumors can significantly affect functional ability and quality of life, a self-reporting instrument for symptom severity and

Free access

Andrés Monserrate, Benjamin Zussman, Alp Ozpinar, Ajay Niranjan, John C. Flickinger and Peter C. Gerszten

–6 , 10 , 13 , 24 , 28 , 31 , 39 Open microsurgical resection remains the mainstay initial treatment of the majority of intradural tumors of the spine, and relatively few published series describe the treatment of intradural spine tumors with stereotactic radiosurgery. 11 , 12 Yet for many patients, stereotactic radiosurgery may be a particularly useful alternative primary or adjuvant treatment strategy. A variety of techniques for conformal radiation delivery to spinal lesions have been used. 1 , 4 , 8 , 10 , 16 , 19 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 42 Because of

Full access

Nikita Lakomkin and Constantinos G. Hadjipanayis

HACs for both patients and providers, several studies have been conducted to identify the predictors of these conditions for higher-risk cohorts, including surgical oncology patients and those with spinal deformity. 8 , 17 Efforts have also been made to better understand associations between HACs and other variables relevant to the postoperative period, including readmissions and prolonged length of stay (LOS). 8 , 9 , 28 However, despite the high complication rate among patients undergoing spine tumor resection, the incidence and risk factors for HACs as well as

Free access

Michael D. Stubblefield, Katarzyna Ibanez, Elyn R. Riedel, Ori Barzilai, Ilya Laufer, Eric Lis, Yoshiya Yamada and Mark H. Bilsky

H igh - dose single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) has become a valuable technique for managing primary and metastatic spine tumors. It allows for tightly conformal treatment plans characterized by a steep dose gradient between target volumes and adjacent radiosensitive normal tissues such as the spinal cord, brachial plexus, and esophagus. Multiple reports have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of SF-SRS for a variety of tumor types with or without tumor separation surgery and/or prior radiation. 1 , 6 , 9–11 , 16 , 22 , 26 , 28 , 31

Restricted access

Ronny Kalash, Scott M. Glaser, John C. Flickinger, Steven Burton, Dwight E. Heron, Peter C. Gerszten, Johnathan A. Engh, Nduka M. Amankulor and John A. Vargo

tumors was initially reported in the late 1990s. 2 , 5 Reports from numerous additional single-institution cohort series that highlight the potential safety and efficacy of SBRT as a nonoperative alternative for a variety of benign spinal tumors have since been published. 3 , 5 , 8 , 17 , 18 Unlike patients treated with SBRT for malignant metastatic spinal tumors, patients with benign spine tumors have a long natural history. Continuous long-term follow-up is warranted both for the evaluation of tumor control and to address concerns regarding delayed myelopathy