No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVE Knowledge on the management of spinal cord astrocytoma (SCA) remains scarce. Here, the authors constructed and validated a predictive nomogram, often used for individualized prognosis and evaluations, to estimate cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with SCA. METHODS Epidemiological characteristics were compared between low-grade SCA (LGSCA) and high-grade SCA (HGSCA) patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Risk factors for CSS and OS were determined using univariate and multivariate analyses and Kaplan-Meier curves. A nomogram was developed to individually predict the 3-, 5-, and 10-year CSS and OS rates. The clinical usefulness of the nomogram was assessed using calibration plots, the concordance index (C-index), and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS A total of 468 LGSCA and 165 HGSCA patients were eligible for inclusion. LGSCA and HGSCA patients demonstrated differences in age, tumor extension, insurance status, adjuvant treatment, and survival. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that in the LGSCA group, tumor extension, surgery type, and adjuvant therapy were individually associated with CSS. The distance of tumor extension and WHO grade were individually associated with CSS in the HGSCA group. The prognostic variables were further demonstrated using the Kaplan-Meier method, which also suggested that adjuvant treatment provided no advantage to HGSCA patients. A nomogram was constructed, and the C-index for CSS was 0.84 by internal validation (95% CI 0.79–0.90). CONCLUSIONS This research suggests that the distance of tumor extension, type of surgery, and adjuvant therapy are significant risk factors for CSS using multivariate analysis in the LGSCA group. Adjuvant treatment provided no advantages for CSS or OS in patients with HGSCAs. The nomogram may be clinically useful to healthcare providers.

BackgroundNo prior reports have focused on spinal cord injury (SCI) characteristics or inflammation after destruction of the blood–spinal cord barrier by syringomyelia. This study aimed to determine the differences in syringomyelia-related central SCI between craniocervical junction (CCJ) syringomyelia and post-traumatic syringomyelia (PTS) before and after decompression.MethodsIn all, 106 CCJ, 26 CCJ revision and 15 PTS patients (mean history of symptoms, 71.5 ± 94.3, 88.9 ± 85.5, and 32.3 ± 48.9 months) between 2015 and 2019 were included. The symptom course was analyzed with the American Spinal Injury Association ASIA and Klekamp–Samii scoring systems, and neurological changes were analyzed by the Kaplan–Meier statistics. The mean follow-up was 20.7 ± 6.2, 21.7 ± 8.8, and 34.8 ± 19.4 months.ResultsThe interval after injury was longer in the PTS group, but the natural history of syringomyelia was shorter (p = 0.0004 and 0.0173, respectively). The initial symptom was usually paraesthesia (p = 0.258), and the other main symptoms were hypoesthesia (p = 0.006) and abnormal muscle strength (p = 0.004), gait (p < 0.0001), and urination (p < 0.0001). SCI associated with PTS was more severe than that associated with the CCJ (p = 0.003). The cavities in the PTS group were primarily located at the thoracolumbar level, while those in the CCJ group were located at the cervical-thoracic segment at the CCJ. The syrinx/cord ratio of the PTS group was more than 75% (p = 0.009), and the intradural adhesions tended to be more severe (p < 0.0001). However, there were no significant differences in long-term clinical efficacy or peripheral blood inflammation markers (PBIMs) except for the red blood cell (RBC) count (p = 0.042).ConclusionPTS tends to progress faster than CCJ-related syringomyelia. Except for the RBC count, PBIMs showed no value in distinguishing the two forms of syringomyelia. The predictive value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for syringomyelia-related inflammation was negative except in the acute phase.

OBJECTIVERecurrent tethered cord syndrome (TCS), believed to result from tension on the distal portion of the spinal cord, causes a constellation of neurological symptoms. Detethering surgery has been the traditional treatment for TCS. However, in cases of recurrent TCS, there is a risk of new neurological deficits developing, and subsequent retethering is difficult to prevent. Spinal column shortening has been proposed as an alternative technique to reduce the tension on the spinal cord without incurring the morbidity of revision surgery on the spinal cord. The authors compared the perioperative outcomes and morbidity of patients who were treated with one or the other procedure.METHODSThe medical records of 16 adult patients with recurrent TCS who were treated between 2005 and 2018 were reviewed. Eight patients underwent spinal column shortening, and 8 patients underwent revision detethering surgery. Patient demographics, clinical outcomes, and perioperative factors were analyzed. The authors include a video to illustrate their technique of spinal column shortening.RESULTSWithin the spinal column shortening group, no patients experienced any complications, and all 8 patients either improved or stabilized with regard to lower-extremity and bowel and bladder function. Within the revision detethering group, 2 patients had worsening of lower-extremity strength, 3 patients had worsening of bowel and bladder function, and 1 patient had improvement in bladder function. Also, 3 patients had wound-related complications. The median estimated blood loss was 731 ml in the shortening group and 163 ml in the revision detethering group. The median operative time was 358 minutes in the shortening group and 226 minutes in the revision detethering group.CONCLUSIONSClinical outcomes were comparable between the groups, but none of the spinal column shortening patients experienced worsening, whereas 3 of the revision detethering patients did and also had wound-related complications. Although the operative times and blood loss were higher in the spinal column shortening group, this procedure may be an alternative to revision detethering in extremely scarred or complex wound revision cases.