Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
MEDCIDS - Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
J Neurooncol. 2021 May;153(1):65-77. doi: 10.1007/s11060-021-03742-6. Epub 2021 Apr 3.
En bloc spondylectomy is the gold standard for surgical resection of sacral chordomas (CHO), but the effect of extent of resection on recurrence and survival in patients with CHO of the cervical spine remains elusive.
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane were systematically reviewed. Patients with cervical CHO treated at three tertiary-care academic institutions were reviewed for inclusion. We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis to assess the overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) after en bloc-gross total resection (GTR) and intralesional-GTR compared to subtotal resection (STR). We then performed an intention-to-treat analysis including all patients with attempted en bloc resection in the en bloc group, regardless of the surgical margins.
There was a total of 13 series including 161 patients with cervical CHO, including our current series of 22 patients. GTR (en bloc-GTR + intralesional-GTR) was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of local progression (pooled hazard ratio (PHR) = 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.59; p = 0.003) and risk of death (PHR 0.31; 95%; CI 0.12-0.83; p = 0.020). A meta-regression analyses determined that intralesional-GTR improved PFS (PHR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16-0.76; p = 0.009) as well as OS (PHR 0.25; 95% CI 0.08-0.79; p = 0.019) when compared to STR. En bloc-GTR was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of local progression (PHR 0.06; 95% CI 0.01-0.77; p = 0.030), but not a decreased OS (PHR 0.50; 95% CI 0.19-1.27; p = 0.145). Our intention-to-treat analyses revealed a near significant improvement in OS for the en bloc group (PHR: 0.15; 95% CI 0.02-1.22; p = 0.054), and nearly identical improvement in PFS. Radiation data was not available for the studies included in the meta-analysis.
This is the first and only meta-analysis of patients with cervical CHO. We found that both en bloc-GTR and intralesional-GTR resulted in improved local tumor control when compared to STR.
整块切除术是手术切除骶骨脊索瘤(CHO)的金标准,但颈椎 CHO 患者的切除范围对复发和生存的影响仍不清楚。
系统检索 MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus 和 Cochrane 数据库。纳入在三家三级学术医疗机构接受治疗的颈椎 CHO 患者。我们进行了个体参与者数据荟萃分析,以评估整块-全切除(GTR)和腔内-GTR 与次全切除(STR)后总生存(OS)和无进展生存(PFS)。然后,我们进行了意向治疗分析,包括整块组中所有尝试整块切除的患者,无论手术切缘如何。
共有 13 个系列,包括 161 例颈椎 CHO 患者,包括我们当前的 22 例患者。GTR(整块-GTR+腔内-GTR)与局部进展风险降低显著相关(合并危险比(HR)=0.22;95%CI 0.08-0.59;p=0.003)和死亡风险降低相关(HR=0.31;95%CI 0.12-0.83;p=0.020)。一项荟萃回归分析确定,与 STR 相比,腔内-GTR 可改善 PFS(HR=0.35;95%CI 0.16-0.76;p=0.009)和 OS(HR=0.25;95%CI 0.08-0.79;p=0.019)。整块-GTR 与局部进展风险降低显著相关(HR=0.06;95%CI 0.01-0.77;p=0.030),但 OS 无降低(HR=0.50;95%CI 0.19-1.27;p=0.145)。我们的意向治疗分析显示,整块组的 OS 有显著改善趋势(HR:0.15;95%CI 0.02-1.22;p=0.054),PFS 也几乎相同。荟萃分析中纳入的研究均未提供放疗数据。
这是首例也是唯一一项针对颈椎 CHO 患者的荟萃分析。我们发现,与 STR 相比,整块-GTR 和腔内-GTR 均可改善局部肿瘤控制。