Metastatic Spine Tumor Surgery: A Comparative Study of Minimally Invasive Approach Using Percutaneous Pedicle Screws

Naresh Kumar1, Rishi Malhotra, Karthikeyan Maharajan

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore.

Abstract

Insights

Minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) offers similar clinical outcomes to open surgery for metastatic spine disease (MSD). MISS shows advantages in reduced blood loss and earlier initiation of radiotherapy/chemotherapy.

Area of Science:

  • Spinal Surgery
  • Oncology
  • Neurosurgery

Background:

  • Metastatic spine disease (MSD) is a growing concern.
  • Minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) is increasingly recognized for potential benefits.
  • Limited comparative studies exist between MISS and open approaches for MSD.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare clinical and perioperative outcomes of MISS versus open surgery in MSD patients.
  • To evaluate posterior spinal stabilization and/or decompression efficacy.
  • To assess pain control, neurological function, and recovery metrics.

Main Methods:

  • Prospective cohort study of 45 MSD patients.
  • Comparison between 27 MISS patients and 18 open surgery patients.
  • Data collection included preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters, with follow-up up to 4 years.

Main Results:

  • Both MISS and open approaches yielded similar improvements in pain, neurological status, and functional scores.
  • MISS demonstrated significantly less intraoperative blood loss (P<0.001).
  • Radiotherapy/chemotherapy initiation was significantly earlier after MISS (13 days vs. 24 days, P<0.001).

Conclusions:

  • MISS provides comparable clinical outcomes to open surgery for MSD.
  • MISS is associated with reduced blood loss and facilitates earlier adjuvant cancer treatment.
  • MISS represents a viable and potentially advantageous surgical option for MSD management.

Related Concept Videos