Prognostic scoring system for surgical treatment of intramedullary spinal cord metastases.

Although rare, intramedullary spinal cord metastases (ISCMs) are on the rise, most likely due to prolonged survival and improved outcomes as a result of the advances in cancer treatment for cancer patients. While the management of these lesions remains controversial, surgery for ISCM has recently been advocated for selected patients. We performed a retrospective analysis on 30 patients who were surgically treated for intramedullary spinal cord metastases in order to determine a preoperative prognostic scoring system to guide patient selection for surgical interventions. The scoring system was designed to decide between surgery or other therapeutic procedures. The five parameters selected and employed in the assessment system were: 1) patient's general condition, 2) age, 3) primary site of the cancer, 4) number of other extramedullary metastases and 5) severity of neurologic symptoms. Prognosis could not be predicted from a single parameter. These five factors were added together to give a prognostic score between 1 and 10. The average survival period of patients with a prognostic score between 1 and 3 points was 3 months; 11 patients with a score of 4 and 5 points had a mean survival of 7.63 months, while patients with a prognostic score between 6 and 10 was 14.8 months. According to our prognostic scoring system for surgical treatment of ISCM, surgery should be performed in those patients who score above 6 points, while radiotherapy/chemotherapy or palliative care is recommended for those who score between 1 and 3 points. A prognostic score of 4 and 5 represents a grey area where surgeons must use their judgment on whether to intervene either medically or surgically. This scoring system could facilitate decision-making in the management of patients with intramedullary spinal cord metastases.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.