The Efficacy of a Multidisciplinary Approach and Diagnostic-Therapeutic Algorithm for Vertebral Metastases with Spinal Cord Compression
Rossella Rispoli,Fabrizia Giorgiutti,Claudio Veltri,Edi Copetti,Pietro Imbruce',Giorgia Iacopino,Barbara Cappelletto
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60071020
2024-06-21
Abstract:Background and Objectives: Metastatic spinal cord compression represents a substantial risk to patients, given its potential for spinal cord and/or nerve root compression, which can result in severe morbidity. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a diagnostic-therapeutic algorithm developed at our hospital to mitigate the devastating consequences of spinal cord compression in patients with vertebral metastases. Materials and Methods: The algorithm, implemented in our practice in January 2022, is based on collective clinical experience and involves collaboration between emergency room physicians, oncologists, spine surgeons, neuroradiologists, radiation oncologists, and oncologists. To minimize potential confounding effects from the COVID-19 pandemic, data from the years 2019 and 2021 (pre-protocol) were collected and compared with data from the years 2022 and 2023 (post-protocol), excluding the year 2020. Results: From January 2022 to December 2023, 488 oncological patients were assessed, with 45 presenting with urgency due to suspected spinal cord compression. Out of these, 44 patients underwent surgical procedures, with 25 performed in emergency settings and 19 cases in elective settings. Comparatively, in 2019 and 2021, 419 oncological patients were evaluated, with 28 presenting with urgency for suspected spinal cord compression. Of these, 17 underwent surgical procedures, with 10 performed in emergency scenarios and 7 in elective scenarios. Comparing the pre-protocol period (years 2019 and 2021) to the post-protocol period (years 2022 and 2023), intrahospital consultations (commonly patients neurologically compromised) for spine metastasis decreased (105 vs. 82), while outpatient consultations increased remarkably (59 vs. 124). Discussion: Accurate interpretation of symptoms within the context of metastatic involvement is crucial for patients with a history of malignancy, whether presenting in the emergency room or oncology department. Even in the absence of a cancer history, careful interpretation of pain characteristics and clinical signs is crucial for diagnosing vertebral metastasis with incipient or current spinal cord compression. Early surgical or radiation intervention is emphasized as it provides the best chance to prevent deficits or improve neurological status. Preliminary findings suggest a notable increase in both the number of patients diagnosed with suspected spinal cord compression and the proportion undergoing surgical intervention following the implementation of the multidisciplinary protocol. The reduced number of intrahospital consultations (commonly patients neurologically compromised) and the increased number of visits of outpatients with vertebral metastases indicate a heightened awareness of the issue, leading to earlier identification and intervention before neurological worsening necessitating hospitalization. Conclusions: A comprehensive treatment planning approach is essential, and our multidisciplinary algorithm is a valuable tool for optimizing patient outcomes. The protocol shows potential in improving timely management of spinal cord compression in oncological patients. Further analysis of the factors driving these changes is warranted. Limitations: This study has limitations, including potential biases from the retrospective nature of data collection and the exclusion of 2020 data due to COVID-19 impact. To enhance the robustness of our results, long-term studies are required. Moreover, the single-center study design may limit the validity of the findings. Further multicenter studies would be beneficial for validating our results and exploring underlying factors in detail.