Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Neuro-Oncology

Updated 02.15.2025
Released 12.29.1993
Expires For CME 02.15.2028

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Authors: Deric M Park MD FACP, Elizabeth Ginalis MD

See Contributor Disclosures

Cite this article

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

In This Article

Quick Link

Introduction

Overview

This article reviews the epidemiology, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. If left untreated, this can become a neurologic emergency secondary to progressive compression resulting in neurologic deficits including weakness, paresthesias, and/or bowel and bladder dysfunction. Consequently, prompt diagnosis and treatment are imperative to preserve neurologic function and control disease progression. Evaluation by a multidisciplinary team of oncology, radiation oncology, and neurosurgery is imperative in the patient’s overall care.

Key points

	• Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression must be considered in the differential diagnosis of new cervical, thoracic, or lumbar pain in cancer patients.
	• Pain is the most common symptom in metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.
	• Other symptoms can include motor weakness, sensory loss, and bowel and bladder incontinence. These symptoms often occur late, and the outcome is worse when they are present.
	• Inability to walk at presentation is a poor prognostic sign.
	• Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine with and without contrast is the diagnostic test of choice.
	• Systemic steroids should be given immediately to almost all patients with epidural spinal cord compression. Definitive treatment is variable depending on the characteristics of the individual patient but may include one or more of the following: surgery often in the form of decompression with or without instrumentation, external beam radiation therapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy or radiosurgery, laser interstitial thermal therapy, vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty, and/or chemotherapy.

Historical note and terminology

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is defined as compression of the spinal cord or nerve roots from a metastatic lesion outside the spinal dura. In one of the earliest reviews on extradural spinal cord tumors, this entity was classified as primary extradural (arising from structures within the vertebral canal), secondary extradural (arising from structures outside the vertebral canal that secondarily invade the extradural space), and metastatic (31). "Pain in the back" was noted to precede the appearance of cord dysfunction. The cord symptoms were often noted to progress rapidly to flaccid paraplegia, although a slowly progressive spastic paraplegia could occur.

Clinical manifestations

Presentation and course

Pain is the initial complaint in up to 97% of patients with epidural spinal cord compression (78; 131). It is unusual for patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression to present without pain, but patients with cord compression from lung or renal metastases and lymphoma do so more frequently (09; 47; 127). Pain may precede neurologic symptoms by days to as long as 3 or more years (09). The median duration of pain before the development of neurologic signs varies from 7 to 23 weeks (44; 127; 03). Pain is often described as localized, mechanical, radicular, or a combination. Local pain is considered secondary to inflammation from tumor growth or stretching of the pain-sensitive cortical bone and periosteum (121). Local pain is usually constant, described as aching, and relentlessly progressive (44; 78). It is often worse at night or with recumbency. Although worsening of pain on recumbency is common with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, the absence of this characteristic symptom should not falsely reassure the practitioner to exclude the possibility of spinal cord compression (44). In fact, in one prospective study of 319 patients with spinal cord compression, only 19% reported exacerbation of pain when lying flat (78). Mechanical pain is pain that is worse with movement and activity. Pain made worse by or only present with movement can be a warning that there is underlying instability in the thoracic spine or the thoracolumbar junction because of pathologic movement (99; 75). This type of pain may also be due to a pathologic fracture. Radicular pain often develops after localized pain and is described as shooting or burning. The pain is frequently bilateral, more commonly in the lumbosacral regions. It is secondary to nerve root compression or infiltration by the tumor or collapsed pathologic vertebral body fracture. The distribution of pain may assist with localization (55; 126). However, pain can also be misleading as to localization. In one study, just over 50% of patients experienced pain at a level different than the location of their spinal cord compression (78). Referred pain, distant from the lesion and nondermatomal, occasionally occurs, such as an L1 vertebral mass causing sacroiliac joint pain (126). These symptoms can be misleading and may result in a workup focused on the wrong anatomic area (100).

Weakness is present in up to 80% of patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression at presentation. At the time of diagnosis, between 33% to 52% of patients are ambulatory, 35% are paraparetic, and 15% are paraplegic (08). Once weakness is present, progression is often rapid, and 30% of patients with weakness become paraplegic within 1 week (121). Thus, rapid diagnosis and treatment is crucial in any patient with suspected metastatic spinal cord compression. The rate of progression of weakness depends on the tumor growth rate (09; 55). Those with lesions above the conus will have weakness and often exhibit hyperreflexia and spasticity. Those with lesions at the level of the cauda equina or with nerve root impingement will have weakness associated with hyporeflexia and decreased tone.

Objective sensory disturbance is found in up to 68% of patients at the time of diagnosis (78). The severity of sensory loss almost always mirrors the severity of motor weakness (09; 20; 131). The sensory loss usually begins distally in the lower extremities and ascends, with patients complaining of "pins and needles" or that "my feet are asleep" (100). A sensory level is identified in up to 52% of patients but, similar to radicular pain, can be poorly correlative to the level of the compressive lesion. In one study, the sensory level varied by up to 10 dermatomes above or below the lesion (78). Lhermitte sign, the sensation of an electrical shock spreading down the spinal column and into the arms and legs with flexion of the neck, is also experienced in up to 15% of patients with cervical pathology (99). In some patients, ataxia has also been reported as the primary manifestation of epidural spinal cord compression without other deficits (50), potentially leading to diagnostic failure and causing treatment delay.

Bladder and bowel symptoms are a later finding but may be present at the time of diagnosis. About 20% of patients have mild bladder dysfunction (urgency and frequency), and as many as 48% have more severe dysfunction like retention or incontinence (08). Symptoms of hesitancy and retention tend to be more common than urgency and incontinence. Autonomic disturbance is a bad prognostic sign, as it implies bilateral cord or root damage and is usually associated with moderate to severe weakness.

Prognosis and complications

Determining the expected prognosis at the time of diagnosis is important, as prognosis can guide treatment decisions in the individual patient. Prognosis is influenced by several factors including neurologic function at the time of treatment, speed of neurologic deterioration, delay between development of neurologic deficits and treatment, time from diagnosis of primary malignancy to development of epidural spinal cord metastases, systematic disease burden, and aggressiveness of the tumor histology.

In general, overall survival in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is about 6 to 8.9 months (121; 131; 10). However, this is likely an underestimate with modern advances in oncologic treatments resulting in better prognosis, as suggested by longer median survival in more recently published studies. In a prospective study of 153 patients, pretreatment ambulatory patients had a median survival of 7 months, and pretreatment nonambulatory patients had a median survival of 1.5 months (55). The general median survival range for pretreatment ambulatory patients is 7 to 12 months, and for pretreatment nonambulatory patients it is 1 to 4 months.

The degree of neurologic dysfunction at presentation is the most significant prognostic variable for recovery of neurologic function (86; 55). The most important prognostic factor for ambulation after treatment is the prior neurologic status. Sixty percent to 99% (with an average of 81%) of patients who were ambulatory at presentation remain so after treatment (42). In contrast, only 6% to 67% (average 32%) of nonambulantory patients regain the ability to walk after treatment (42). Between 30% and 45% of patients who are nonambulatory with antigravity proximal leg function will regain ambulation, whereas only 5% of patients who have no antigravity proximal leg function will walk again (54; 147). A more recent study reported slightly better outcomes, revealing that 55% (n=17) of patients who were nonambulatory before surgery became ambulatory after decompression (133).

Overall, a worse American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) score at presentation and postoperative evaluation is associated with worse health-related quality of life and decreased overall survival (12; 93). The likelihood of postoperative ambulation also increases if treatment begins less than 12 hours after loss of ambulation and if patients have sparing of bowel and bladder function and sacral sensation (23). However, rapid onset of symptoms and quick progression are poor prognostic variables (19). Ambulatory patients with slow symptom development have improved survival rates and a likelihood of posttreatment ambulation (65; 01). In one study, patients whose motor deficits developed over more than 14 days were more likely to regain or maintain ambulation at the end of treatment (56% ambulatory before radiation, 86% ambulatory after radiation). In contrast, those who developed symptoms in fewer than 7 days were less likely to be walking at the end of treatment (48% ambulatory before treatment, 35% after radiation) (104). One theory behind this finding is that rapid development of neurologic dysfunction may represent compression and injury due to arterial infarction, whereas slow development of neurologic deficits may represent venous congestion. In addition, pathologic compression fractures were associated independently with a decreased ambulatory status. Younger patients had greater improvement in neurologic function postoperatively than older patients after surgery for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (04). In children with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, prognosis for recovery from complete motor and sensory loss was significantly better than in adults, with 50% of children becoming ambulatory after surgical decompression and medical therapy (70).

Another important factor in survival is tumor type. Breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, myeloma, and lymphoma are associated with longer survival times and higher rates of posttreatment ambulation than other cancer types (88; 65; 110). Lung and colorectal cancer are associated with the poorest survival (93). In a retrospective review of 148 patients, those with breast cancer and hematological malignancy showed the highest median overall survival of 42.8 months, whereas lung cancer patients showed a worse prognosis with median overall survival of 4.2 months (131). Amelot and colleagues also reported similar median overall survival of 5.9 months in patients with lung spinal metastasis; however, the group reported better survival in patients carrying EGFR-positive status (05). Interestingly, immunotherapy was not an independent prognostic factor of survival. Myeloma, lymphoma, and breast carcinoma have almost an 80% initial response rate to epidural spinal cord compression treatment (44; 47; 87). Only 25% of patients with lung or renal carcinoma and melanoma respond to any treatment modality and have a median survival rate of about 3 months (44; 87). One study found that the posttreatment ambulation rate in patients with breast cancer was 69%, whereas another study showed that only 15% of patients with lung cancer were ambulatory after treatment (08; 88).

In addition to tumor type, the location and size of the tumor naturally influence prognosis. Upper thoracic and cervical thoracic lesions and a circumferential angle of spinal cord compression greater than 180 degrees have been associated with a higher risk of poor postoperative neurologic outcomes (77). The epidural spinal cord compression (ESCC) scale, known as the Bilsky score, measures spinal cord compression from tumor using the MRI axial T2-weighted images at the site of the most severe compression. The Bilsky score includes a 6-point system with grades from 0 to 3 (15):

Grade 0: The lesion is confined within the bone only.
Grade 1: There is epidural extension without cord compression. Grade 1 is further divided into 1a, 1b, and 1c:
	• Grade 1a shows epidural extension only.
	• Grade 1b shows deformation of the thecal sac but without spinal cord abutment.
	• Grade 1c shows deformation of the thecal sac with spinal cord abutment.
Grade 2: There is spinal cord compression with CSF visible around the cord.
Grade 3: There is spinal cord compression with no CSF visibility around the cord.

The Bilsky scale presents a radiographic classification for the severity of cord compression and can be utilized to direct treatment. A single-center, retrospective study found that patients with Bilsky grade 2-3 compression were associated with decreased overall survival and worse postoperative KPS (14). Another study published a 12-point grading system for epidural spinal cord compression based on MRI imaging and found that higher grades were correlated with worse neurologic status based on the ASIA scale (21). However, a study utilizing the Bilsky 6-point scale found that MRI findings of spinal cord compression did not consistently correlate with the severity of patients’ symptoms in clinical practice (136). Consequently, imaging findings should not stand alone as an independent factor for prognosis and treatment guidance.

Multiple scoring systems have been proposed for predicting pretreatment prognosis, including the SORG Classic, SORG nomogram, Tomita score, Tokuhashi score, Bauer score, Rades score, Linden score, and Katagiri score. They were all developed using a combination of the known predictive factors that contribute to outcome. Some predict outcome after a certain definitive treatment (ie, radiation therapy). Unifying characteristics of these scoring systems include primary site of cancer and visceral involvement and prediction of survival time, usually on the matter of fewer than 6 months, 6 to 12 months, and greater than 12 months. A review evaluating all of these scoring systems found that the SORG nomogram was most accurate at predicting 30- and 90-day mortality, whereas the original Tokuhashi score was best at predicting 365-day survival (02; 64). A separate study revealed that a “good prognosis” per the Rades score predicted the best outcomes in a cohort of patients that underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy for postoperative reirradiation of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (59). Table 1 shows Rades and colleagues’ survival rate based on prognostic factors for patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression treated with radiation therapy.

Table 1. Significant Prognostic Factors and Corresponding Scores in Patients With Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Treated With Radiation Therapy

Prognostic factor		Score (points)
Type of primary tumor
	• Breast cancer • Prostate cancer • Myeloma/lymphoma • Lung cancer • Other tumors	8 7 9 3 4
Other bone metastases at the time of radiation therapy
	• Yes • No	5 7
Visceral metastases at the time of radiation therapy
	• Yes • No	2 8
Interval from tumor diagnosis to metastatic spinal cord compression
	• Less than or equal to 15 months • Greater than 15 months	4 7
Ambulatory status before radiation therapy
	• Ambulatory • Nonambulatory	7 3
Time of developing motor deficits before radiation therapy
	• 0-7 days • 7-14 days • Greater than 14 days	3 6 8
Total points		6 month survival (%)
	• 20-25 • 25-30 • 31-35 • 36-40 • 40-46	11 20 48 72 93
(102)

Clinical vignette

A 55-year-old male with a history of prostate carcinoma diagnosed 2 years prior and managed with radical prostatectomy presented with 8 months of midback pain that worsened over the preceding 5 months. The midback pain was worse when the patient was lying supine but was not made worse by activity. Over the course of 2 weeks, the patient had a second type of pain radiating around his upper abdomen that felt like he had "a rope tightened around his chest." Later, he developed difficulty arising from chairs and then had to use a walker for assistance. He denied having arm weakness, sensory complaints, and bowel or bladder difficulty. On neurologic examination, there was tenderness to palpation in the area of the T6 to T8 vertebral bodies. Mental status and cranial nerves were normal. The patient walked with a waddling gait and was unable to arise from a chair without using his hands. On motor exam, upper extremity strength was 5/5 bilaterally. In the lower extremities, the tone was normal, with strength 4/5 at the iliopsoas and 5/5 distally. Reflexes were 2+ and symmetrical in the upper and lower extremities, with Babinski signs present bilaterally. Sensory examination was normal except for minimally decreased vibratory sense in the lower extremities. Straight-leg raising, reverse straight-leg raising, and Patrick sign were negative. Voluntary anal contraction and deep anal pressure were normal. The preliminary diagnosis was metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, and the patient was treated emergently with dexamethasone 100 mg intravenously and then started on dexamethasone 24 mg by mouth four times daily. The patient underwent an emergency MRI scan showing two areas of vertebral involvement: one with epidural spinal cord compression at T8 and the second with asymptomatic metastases at L3. Four hours later, the patient underwent anterior vertebral body resection at T8, with the placement of titanium pedicle screws and rods from T6 to T10. The patient tolerated the procedure well except for a postoperative urinary tract infection. Steroids were tapered over 2 weeks, and strength returned to normal at postoperative day 7. A few weeks after surgery, the patient received radiation therapy at a dose of 30 Gy, from T6 to L5, over 2 weeks.

Biological basis

Etiology and pathogenesis

Primary locations of involvement of epidural spinal metastasis. The epidural space is a true space between the dura enclosing the spinal cord and the bony canal, which contains fat, connective tissue, and a rich paravertebral venous plexus that drains the vertebrae and intervertebral spaces. Epidural metastases may originate from the vertebral columns, with the vertebral body as the most common site (85% to 89%) but also the paravertebral tissue (10% to 15%) and, rarely, the epidural space itself. The location of epidural metastatic involvement is important for the surgical treatment of epidural spinal cord compression. Direct extension of epidural metastasis from a vertebral body often arises from carcinoma of the breast, lung, prostate, or plasma cell. Epidural lesions extending through the intervertebral foramina often arise from an adjacent prevertebral lymph node in lymphoma, sarcoma, or neuroblastoma (24; 03).

Mechanism of metastatic disease spreading to epidural spinal lesion. Three proposed mechanisms are present for metastatic epidural spinal cord lesions. The most common mechanism (80%) is hematogenous arterial spread to bone marrow. The vertebral body is the most common location for bony metastasis of the vertebral columns due to the presence of red marrow throughout its lifetime and the high vascularity compared to other bony parts of the vertebral column. The lesion often starts in the vertebral body and may grow posteriorly, affecting the posterior elements, including the pedicles and lamina. Metastatic lesions may also arise directly into the epidural space through the neural foramina from the paravertebral tissues (69), such as lymph nodes in lymphoma. A third probable mechanism is retrograde venous spread from the primary site via the Batson paravertebral plexus. The valveless epidural Batson venous plexus is a network of bidirectional flow between pelvic veins and the thoracic internal vertebral plexus. It is postulated that an increase in abdominal pressure (such as during Valsalva maneuver) can cause retrograde flow from the abdomen and pelvis into the epidural venous plexus, seeding tumor cells into the epidural space. Once in the epidural space, the tumor usually grows along the path of least resistance.

Two main compression patterns have been identified: predominant soft tissue epidural disease and bony collapse with direct neural compression. The epidural lesion can (1) encircle or encroach on the thecal sac; (2) compress the spinal cord or vascular structure, leading to cord compression or infarction of the spinal cord; or (3) occlude the venous plexus of the epidural space, leading to vasogenic edema and infarction of the cord. Additionally, destruction of the vertebral body can result in deformity from direct compression of the bony fragment on the spinal cord or instability of the spinal canal from the collapse of involved vertebrae.

Mechanism underlying spinal cord injury from epidural metastasis. Spinal cord injury due to epidural spinal metastasis occurs due to factors including vasogenic edema, hemorrhage, cord infarction, inflammatory factors, and even demyelination. During the early stage of epidural spinal cord compression, axonal swelling and edema of the spinal cord are observed with preserved spinal cord blood flow. As spinal cord compression progresses, increased swelling and additional mechanical compression compromise spinal cord blood flow. As the blood flow decreases to a critical level in the later stage, spinal cord infarction and hemorrhage can be observed, leading to irreversible injury. Administration of steroids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents decreases the vasogenic edema and prostaglandin E2 and produces objective improvement in weakness, suggesting that vasogenic edema and the release of inflammatory factors play a significant role in neurologic dysfunction (138; 122). Animal models have been used to demonstrate morphologic features of cord damage and subsequent recovery. Following 3 hours of cord compression in cats, selective demyelination without axonal disruption evolves over the subsequent 21 hours and continues for 1 week. Most demyelinated fibers show evidence of remyelination within 1 month (45). If compression is produced slowly over 48 hours and maintained for 7 days, it is still possible to recover from paralysis, suggesting that demyelination is also an important factor in development of neurologic symptoms with epidural metastatic spinal cord compression.

Epidemiology

The overall incidence of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression can only be estimated, as many patients are never diagnosed either due to the development of symptoms after the decision to forgo further testing or therapy has been made or due to the presence of asymptomatic lesions. In a population-based study, the likelihood of developing symptomatic epidural spinal cord compression in the 5 years preceding death was 2.5% and ranged from 7.9% in patients with multiple myeloma to 0.2% in patients with pancreatic cancer (81). A retrospective study of hospitalized patients cited an annual 3.4% incidence of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (84). Another retrospective study focused on regional treatment centers cited a slightly higher incidence of 4.4% to 6% (08). Another study found approximately 20% to 40% of cancer patients develop metastatic spine tumors, and about 20% of those patients ultimately develop metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (21).

In up to 23% of cases, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is the initial manifestation of malignancy (118; 78). Multiple myeloma accounts for 11.1% of this patient population (75). Among patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, the most common underlying tumors are lung, prostate, and breast (84; 132; 93). In the pediatric population, sarcoma, neuroblastoma, and lymphoma have been reported as the most frequent causes of spinal cord compression (112; 03). The thoracic spine is the most common location of metastases, accounting for approximately 60% of cases, with 30% in the lumbosacral spine and 10% in the cervical spine (27; 130; 93). Multiple sites of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression occur in 17% to 30% of patients (140). This is particularly common in breast and prostate cancer and less common in lung cancer (127). The average age at diagnosis of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is approximately 65 years (78; 06; 93). Sex differences reflect the underlying primary neoplasm (eg, breast and prostate).

Prevention

To improve clinical outcomes, it is important to identify patients before the appearance of neurologic symptoms or signs. The most important prognostic factor for functional outcome is neurologic function before treatment. As only about 50% of patients are ambulatory at diagnosis, earlier detection and diagnosis are essential. Failure to recognize metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and delay in treatment can result in irreversible neurologic dysfunction, including weakness, sensory loss, and bowel and bladder dysfunction. Patients with known malignancy should be advised to inform their physician if they develop new back pain, which is the initial complaint in up to 97% of patients who go on to develop metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. High-risk patients are those with known malignancy and recent-onset back pain and patients who are not known to have malignancy but who have new radicular or localized thoracic back pain worse on recumbency or associated with spinal tenderness.

Among oncological patients, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is the initial manifestation in up to 20% of cases in those with unknown cancer history (117). Physicians must focus on history and physical examinations, noting symptoms such as fever, weight loss, malaise, and chills in the setting of new back pain.

Unfortunately, diagnosis of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is often delayed, even in patients with known malignancy and new back pain. In a published prospective study of 301 metastatic epidural spinal cord compression patients who eventually presented to a specialized cancer center, for all patients (those with and without previously diagnosed malignancy), the median delay in treatment from onset of symptoms of spinal cord compression was 14 days (57). When analyzed, 3 days were due to patient delays in seeking medical care, 3 days were due to general practitioner delays, and 4 days were due to hospital delays (57). Rates of treatment delivery within 24 hours of presentation to a medical professional (considered the target) were only 30% for those who presented to a general practitioner, 21% for those who presented to a district general hospital, and 87% who presented to a specialized treatment center (57).

Radiation therapy for bony metastases without metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is believed to prevent the development of epidural metastases. In prostate cancer, irradiation of the lumbar spine coincidental to the irradiation of paraaortic nodes and the normally radiated pelvic area prevented or delayed the development of the lumbar spine metastases, which might significantly reduce cauda equina compression (63). Strontium-89 (Metastron) and the nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate olpadronate have also been found to decrease the incidence of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer metastatic to the skeleton but to a lesser extent than radiotherapy (124).

Differential diagnosis

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is a challenging diagnosis to make promptly, given its initial nonspecific symptom of back pain. The differential diagnosis for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is broad and includes both benign and more concerning causes. When a patient presents with new back pain, multiple differential diagnoses should be considered, including trauma, degenerative changes, inflammatory processes, vascular malformation, infection, and oncologic pathologies.

A history of previous radiation therapy, trauma, or infection is important. Patients with a history of prior radiation therapy are susceptible to developing radiation myelopathy characterized by ascending numbness and weakness in a hemicord pattern. Symptoms usually present 9 to 15 months after radiation, and the risk of development increases with greater total radiation dose and fraction size. History of minor trauma increases the suspicion of a musculoskeletal cause of pain, such as muscle strain and disc disease. Vascular malformations can also present similarly to epidural spinal cord compression. Dural arteriovenous fistulas, the most common vascular malformation in the spinal cord, can produce myelopathy as a result of direct increase in venous pressure or following hemorrhage. Patients often present with progressive gait imbalance, ascending lower extremity weakness, numbness, paresthesias, low back pain, and eventually bowel and bladder dysfunction (61). Dural arteriovenous fistulas may be identified by their "snakelike" appearance on myelography or by demonstrating flow voids or characteristic signal changes of hemorrhage on MRI (83). Nontraumatic epidural hematomas are rare, but patients taking anticoagulants have an increased risk of this complication (114).

Infection should be high on the differential. For one, chemotherapy increases the risk of infections. Additionally, patients with a history of intravenous drug abuse, hematogenous infection, and vertebral osteomyelitis should raise concern for an underlying epidural abscess. The differentiation between epidural abscess and metastasis is often difficult (20). Epidural abscess is more frequently posteriorly situated and will often cover multiple vertebral body segments compared to metastatic epidural cord lesions. If there is vertebral collapse due to an infective cause, the disc space is frequently destroyed, whereas metastatic vertebral disease usually spares the disc space. An epidural abscess may be associated with increased systemic white blood cell count, elevated inflammatory markers, or fever. However, as the dura is an effective barrier, cerebrospinal fluid studies may be normal. Blood cultures often yield the causative organism, but an image-guided biopsy of the affected vertebral body is often required to differentiate between abscess and malignancy.

Other malignancy-related etiologies should also be considered in patients with new back pain and known malignancy, including vertebral metastases without epidural spinal cord compression, malignant plexopathy, leptomeningeal metastases/carcinomatous meningitis, and intramedullary metastases. Malignant plexopathy usually presents with radicular pain followed by weakness and sensory disturbance (hyperesthesia or hypoesthesia) in the correlating distribution of the plexus. Breast and lung cancers are most commonly associated with brachial plexopathy, whereas gynecological malignancies and lymphomas are associated with lumbosacral plexopathies. Diagnosis can be confirmed with an MRI of the affected area. Leptomeningeal metastases or carcinomatous meningitis usually present with headaches, altered mental status, multiple cranial nerve palsies, cauda equina syndrome, and even seizures. Some patients also have radicular pain. MRI may or may not always reveal contrast enhancement (lumbar puncture showing an elevated opening pressure and CSF studies revealing low glucose, elevated protein, and pleocytosis). Intramedullary metastases are much less common than epidural metastases and are most common in patients with lung cancer. They usually present with sensory disturbances followed by motor symptoms, as lesions are most commonly located in the posterior cord (121). Some patients present with Brown-Sequard syndrome, which can clinically distinguish intramedullary from epidural cord lesions. Brown-Sequard syndrome is characterized by weakness and impairment to light touch and vibration ipsilateral to the lesion, with contralateral impairment of pinprick and temperature (121).

Diagnostic workup

The most predictive prognostic factor in outcome is neurologic function at time of initiation of treatment. Thus, timely diagnosis is essential. The goal is to quickly establish radiographic evidence of thecal sac compression and begin treatment within 24 to 48 hours of presentation. Optimally, diagnosis is made and treatment started prior to permanent spinal cord damage. MRI of the spine with and without contrast is noninvasive and effectively demonstrates metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. It can also give a clear image of the spinal cord to better diagnose intramedullary disease. Consequently, MRI is typically considered the diagnostic imaging modality of choice and is ideally obtained within 24 hours of presentation for patients with clinical suspicion of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Computed tomography myelogram is an acceptable alternative when MRI is not readily available. Plain computed tomography of the spine is the standard for evaluation of pathological vertebral column fractures that may be present in addition to epidural compression and may alter recommended treatment if present.

In one study, Kienstra and colleagues prospectively looked at 170 cases with cancer and back pain to identify a subpopulation of patients in whom MRI can be omitted because of a low risk of spinal epidural metastases (67). From a detailed neurologic history and examination, with the hypothesis that missing any case of spinal epidural metastases is unacceptable, no neurologic criteria were able to diagnose all cases. Therefore, the authors concluded that all patients should have an MRI unless the probability is extremely low.

Thoracic spine coronal MRI showing rib sarcoma

Coronal MRI, T1 study, showing thoracic (dorsal) cord compression and lateral displacement due to a large primary sarcoma, arising from the rib in a 12-year-old boy with a 2-month history of progressive spastic paraparesis. (Provi...
Thoracic spine axial MRI showing rib sarcoma

Axial MRI, T1 study, showing thoracic (dorsal) cord compression and lateral displacement due to a large primary sarcoma, arising from the rib in a 12-year-old boy with a 2-month history of progressive spastic paraparesis. (Provide...
Epidural spinal cord compression (MRI)

MRI (using the body coil) showing 2 areas of vertebral involvement: one with epidural spinal cord compression at T8 and another asymptomatic L3 metastasis. (Contributed by Dr. Harry Greenberg.)
Severe metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MRI)

MRI (using local spinal coil) showing severe metastatic epidural spinal cord compression with collapse of C5 vertebral body and severe destruction of posterior elements and local invasion of C4 and C6 vertebral bodies. (Contribute...

Complete MRI of the spine, including sagittal and axial T1- and T2-weighted images and contrast-enhanced images with gadolinium, is considered standard of care and is necessary for maximum sensitivity (68). All patients with suspected metastatic epidural spinal cord compression should have their entire spine imaged. MRI may identify asymptomatic second areas of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, which is important for treatment planning. In a retrospective study of 337 cases, failure to image either the thoracic or lumbosacral spine when symptomatic disease was elsewhere would have missed 21% of secondary metastatic lesions, whereas failure to image the cervical spine with symptomatic disease elsewhere would have missed only 1% of cases (119). Anatomical definition of vertebral and extraspinal disease on MRI is necessary when planning a surgical procedure. Control of pain before imaging may help to prevent movement artifact.

Myelography is an invasive procedure involving lumbar puncture and radio-opaque dye injection into the thecal space, typically followed by CT scan. Myelography does not visualize the spinal cord parenchyma, but it does detect intradural and extradural lesions. Bony lesions are also well-defined on CT scan. Clinical deterioration may occur directly following myelography; however, it is difficult to separate this from natural history of disease. In one small study, no patients who underwent CT myelogram experienced this potential complication (49). If there is a complete block following lumbar injection, a second puncture for a cervical myelogram or MRI is necessary to visualize the upper limit of the block and to exclude additional affected lesions.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has replaced CT/myelography as the procedure of choice. Although there are little data directly comparing the two, many studies support that MRI is at least equivalent if not superior to CT myelography (49; 79; 58). Intradural extramedullary metastases are equally well diagnosed by gadolinium-enhanced MRI or myelography, with roughly similar sensitivities and specificities (49). Relative advantages to MRI over CT myelography include that it is noninvasive and provides better detail of the surrounding soft tissues, spinal cord parenchyma, leptomeningeal deposits, and the cauda equina. Because it is noninvasive, MRI has fewer risks than CT/myelography in patients with intracranial mass lesions or bleeding tendencies. The main advantage of CT myelography is that opening pressure can be measured and spinal fluid can be obtained for testing, which may help to exclude or confirm alternative diagnoses (eg, carcinomatous meningitis). Where there has been previous surgery or scoliosis, MRI sagittal images can be difficult to interpret due to artifact and surrounding scar tissue. Claustrophobic patients may not tolerate MRI, and those with an incompatible ferromagnetic implant cannot be scanned. Due to its invasiveness and inability to visualize the spinal cord parenchyma, CT myelography is the second imaging choice after MRI. However, it is advisable to get the readily available test because the patient may deteriorate while waiting for proper investigation.

Other imaging modalities such as bone scans, positron emission tomography (PET) scans, and CT scans are sometimes obtained, but these are all inferior to MRI and CT myelography and should not be used as a screening tool in the evaluation of potential metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Radionucleotide bone scans use a radioactive substance to identify diseased bones that show up as “hot spots.” It is superior to x-rays in identifying bony metastatic lesions and has the benefit of visualizing the entire spine in one scan. However, lytic tumors or lesions characteristic of multiple myeloma are not well visualized on bone scans. Furthermore, bone scans provide no information about the thecal sac. PET scans use a radiotracer to identify areas of glucose uptake. Thus, PET scans are better at identifying bony lesions as they can visualize both osteolytic and osteoblastic lesions and are better at identifying lesions in the early stages of growth. Similar to bone scans, PET scans do not visualize the thecal sac. Lastly, plain CT scans are excellent for visualization of the bony spine but do not show the spinal cord or thecal sac.

Lastly, the oncologic work up may include body imaging other than the spine, such as chest radiograph, mammography, abdominal ultrasound, or CT abdomen and chest, which may demonstrate the primary malignancy in patients without a known primary malignancy. Additionally, if the cause of epidural spinal cord compression is uncertain, tissue obtained via CT-guided biopsy of a paraspinal or epidural mass or percutaneous needle biopsy under fluoroscopy of a collapsed vertebral body is often helpful in establishing a diagnosis.

Management

Unfortunately, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression is progressive, and patients will ultimately develop neurologic deficit unless treated. General treatment of the patient with epidural metastatic spinal cord compression includes immediate administration of steroids, followed by definitive therapy comprising one or more of the following: surgery, laser interstitial thermal therapy, cryotherapy, external beam radiation, stereotactic body radiotherapy or radiosurgery, and chemotherapy. The treatment plan will depend on several factors including location and degree of spinal cord compression, evidence of spinal instability, severity of neurologic symptoms, radiosensitivity of the primary tumor, systemic disease control, prior treatments, and patient preference.

Other general management principles include adequate pain control, prevention of deep vein thromboses, and treatment of urinary retention or incontinence and constipation. Pain control can be achieved with a combination of steroids, neuropathic analgesics for those with radicular pain (such as gabapentin), and opiates. Patients with metastatic spinal cord compression are at an increased risk of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolus, especially in those who are nonambulatory. Prophylactic subcutaneous heparin, antiembolic stockings, or compression pumps will help reduce morbidity and mortality. In the presence of urinary retention, intermittent or permanent catheterization should be considered. Regarding the management of constipation, laxatives or suppositories should be initiated early in the course of admission, especially for those requiring opiates for pain control. Standard care should be taken to prevent pressure sores when nursing patients with limited mobility.

Emergency measures. Patients with cancer, back pain, and an abnormal progressing neurologic examination demonstrating myelopathy or radiculopathy should receive glucocorticoids and undergo emergency MRI or computer-assisted tomography or myelography, whichever is more readily available.

Suspected metastatic epidural spinal cord compression with back pain with or without neurologic symptoms (algorithm)

(Contributed by Dr. Harry Greenberg.)

Stable patients with uncertain, mild, or stable neurologic findings can be scanned urgently over the next 24 hours, and if epidural metastatic spinal cord compression is confirmed, should also be started on steroids immediately . Dexamethasone is thought to downregulate the production of vascular endothelial growth factor and prostaglandin E2, which causes a decrease in spinal cord edema and delays the onset of neurologic decline (75). A dexamethasone dose-response effect has been demonstrated in an animal model of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, producing decreased spinal cord water content, reduced epidural swelling, and transient clinical improvement (30). High-dose glucocorticoids are usually part of the standard therapy, but there is little evidence to support high-dose versus lower-dose steroids, and in fact, higher doses have been associated with significant side effects. High-dose intravenous dexamethasone side effects include elevation in blood pressure, glucose intolerance, increased risk of infections, gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation, and electrolyte disturbance. Caution should be used in those suspected of having an infection or gastrointestinal symptoms.

Three randomized clinical trials have attempted to address the utility of steroids. One study addressed outcomes comparing high-dose steroids with placebo, and the other two studies were focused on outcomes comparing high versus moderate-dose steroids. In a study conducted by Sorensen and associates, 57 patients were randomized to dexamethasone 96 mg once followed by 24 mg four times daily for 3 days, then tapered over 10 days versus placebo with normal saline; all patients also received standard radiation therapy (125). Ambulation posttreatment was intact in 81% of patients who received steroids versus 63% of those who did not. At 6 months after treatment, 59% of patients in the steroid group were still walking, whereas only 33% in the placebo group were. There was no difference in median survival between the two groups. A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of 37 patients compared a single high dexamethasone dose (100 mg intravenously) with a conventional initial dose (10 mg intravenously), both subsequently followed by 4 mg orally every 6 hours (16 mg total per day). This study did not demonstrate a significant difference in ambulation, bladder function, or pain control (141). Side effects were not commented on in this study. Another study of 20 patients compared dexamethasone 96 mg daily versus 16 mg daily for 2 days followed by a rapid taper over the following 15 days (46). All patients also underwent standard radiation therapy. Though small, this study showed significant adverse events in five of nine patients in the high-dose group and four of 11 patients in the moderate-dose group and no differences in pain control or ambulation. Lastly, in a nonrandomized series of 28 patients who received high-dose steroids (96 mg dexamethasone followed by a 14-day taper), four serious adverse events occurred (gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation) (52). Due to the incidence of side effects, the next 38 patients in the series received 16 mg dexamethasone followed by a 14-day taper, in whom only three side effect events were documented, none of which were serious. Outcomes between the two groups were similar. A Cochrane metaanalysis revealed that there is no difference in outcome between high-dose and moderate-dose steroids, but there was a higher incidence of serious adverse events in the higher dose groups (40).

In general, patients with rapidly progressive symptoms, paraparesis, or paraplegia should be considered for high-dose dexamethasone followed by a taper. A moderate-dose regimen may also be considered based on the data above that suggest no significant difference in outcome between the two regimens but a higher incidence of side effects with the higher doses. Some patients with small lesions without spinal cord compression may even forgo the use of steroids completely. In one study, 20 patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression without myelopathy on clinical examination and no evidence of high-grade spine invasion on imaging were treated without steroids during 10 fractions of 300 Gy/fraction and did not have clinical deterioration (88). Regardless of the choice of steroid dose, definitive treatment such as chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or surgery (or a combination of one or more) should be planned after diagnosis.

Choice of definitive treatment is complex, but often depends on factors including neurologic symptoms, degree of spinal cord compression, radiosensitivity of the tumor, and presence of spinal instability. One of the most-used decision paradigms for selecting appropriate management for spinal metastatic disease is the NOMS framework (16). This paradigm takes into account neurologic, oncologic, mechanical, and systemic considerations to optimize treatment (16; 38).

NOMS framework

One of the most-used decision paradigms for selecting appropriate management for spinal metastatic disease is the NOMS framework, which takes into account neurologic, oncologic, mechanical, and systemic considerations to optimi...

The neurologic assessment of the decision framework considers the degree of epidural spinal cord compression based on the Bilsky scale discussed previously and presence of myelopathy.

The oncologic assessment of the NOMS framework evaluates the responsiveness of tumors, which is dependent on histology, to available nonoperative treatment options. Specifically, this looks at how responsive the tumor is to radiation therapy as this is a noninvasive approach to local tumor control (38).

The mechanical assessment of the NOMS framework examines spinal stability. Although there is no consensus on the definition of what qualifies for spinal instability, the Spine Oncology Study Group (SOSG) developed the Spine Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) after conducting a systematic literature review to identify the clinical and radiographic characteristics that influence spinal instability (35). SINS shows good reliability for predicting instability and evaluating for surgical candidacy in patients with spinal metastasis (36; 60; 37; 22; 94). This classification system uses six components, one clinical factor, and five radiographic parameters, which are summarized in Table 2. These factors include the location of the vertebral metastasis, mechanical pain, bone lesion quality, spinal alignment, degree of vertebral body collapse, and posterior spinal element involvement. Together, they determine a composite score predictive of spinal instability. Patients with scores exceeding a threshold of 13 are considered at risk of spinal instability and should be considered for surgical stabilization with instrumentation. Interestingly, a retrospective review of 285 patients with metastatic spinal disease revealed that Bilsky grade 3 epidural spinal cord compression was significantly associated with an unstable SINS (p< 0.001) (28).

Table 2. Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) System

Component			Score
Location
	• Junctional (O-C2; C7-T2; T11-L1; L5-S1)		3
	• Mobile spine (C3-C6; L2-L4)		2
	• Semirigid (T3-T10)		1
	• Rigid (S2-S5)		0
Mechanical pain
	• Yes		3
	• No		2
	• Pain free lesion		1
Bone lesion
	• Lytic		2
	• Mixed (lytic/blastic)		1
	• Blastic		0
Radiographic spinal alignment
	• Subluxation/translation present		4
	• Deformity (kyphosis/scoliosis)		2
	• Normal		0
Vertebral body collapse
	• >50% collapse		3
	• <50% collapse		2
	• No collapse with > 50% body involved		1
	• None of the above		0
Posterolateral involvement
	• Bilateral		3
	• Unilateral		1
	• None of the above		0
Total points		Clinical categories		Binary scale
1-6		Stable		Stable
7-12		Potentially unstable		Current/potentially unstable = possible surgical intervention
13-18		Unstable
(36)

Lastly, the systemic assessment portion of the NOMS framework determines the ability of individual patients to tolerate various treatment modalities, such as surgery, based on the burden of metastatic disease (38). The most well-known and commonly used scoring system to assist physicians in predicting survival is the Tokuhashi score (38; 146).

Some have advocated for an even more comprehensive classification system. The LMNOP decision framework is another decision model to guide management of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (98). This system builds on NOMS by including the location and spinal levels of disease as well as the patient’s response to prior treatments. Of course, decision making in these patients can be complex, and a multidisciplinary approach is best used.

Surgery. The role of surgery in epidural metastatic spinal cord tumors is being redefined. In 1978, a retrospective, nonrandomized series of 235 patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression concluded that radiation therapy alone is as effective as decompressive laminectomy and radiation therapy (44). This study was instrumental at the time in changing initial therapy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression from surgery followed by radiation therapy to radiation therapy alone. Patchell and colleagues published a landmark paper in this area in 2005 that redefined standard treatment for these patients. This was a randomized multi-institutional trial comparing lesion-directed decompressive surgery combined with radiotherapy with radiation therapy alone in MESCC patients who were surgical candidates with only one level of cord compression. They found the combination of decompressive surgery with radiation therapy offered a significant advantage for functional outcomes.

Patients treated with surgery and radiation therapy retained the ability to walk for 122 days versus 13 days with radiation therapy alone (p=.006). Significantly more patients in the surgery group (42/50, 84%) than in the radiotherapy group (29/51, 57%) were able to walk after treatment (odds ratio 6.2, p=0.0001). The need for corticosteroids and opiates was significantly reduced in the surgery group. The 30-day mortality rate was 6% in the surgery group versus 14% in the radiation therapy alone group. The survival time was significantly greater in the surgical group, 126 days versus 100 days (p=.033), and the maintenance of continence was significantly longer, 156 days versus 14 days (p=.016). However, inclusion criteria for patients were very restrictive, leading to slow enrollment. Inclusion criteria included patients with a single epidural mass at one location with one symptom or sign referable to the mass and not be paraplegic for greater than 48 hours, and have a 3-month or more life expectancy to be randomized. Cauda equina compression was not considered in this study (96). Only 25% of patients with radiographic epidural spinal cord compression at Johns Hopkins were felt to meet these criteria (13).

This trial renewed the interest in a lesion-directed surgical approach based on the site and level of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Surgery is a major undertaking in patients with metastatic disease who have limited life expectancy. Nevertheless, surgery has been advocated to help the rapidly deteriorating patient by decompressing the spinal cord and nerve roots, correcting spinal instability, relieving pain, maintaining continence, and promoting early mobilization. Due to Patchell and colleagues’ 2005 study, surgery followed by radiation is often proposed as the definitive treatment plan for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression, depending on prognosis (96). Surgical intervention (in addition to adjunct radiation therapy or chemotherapy) provides sustained improvement in neurologic and functional outcomes for patients who have at least a 3-month life expectancy (33).

Not all data support surgical intervention followed by radiation therapy over radiation therapy alone. One retrospective cohort study in which patients were matched on multiple prognostic factors did not find any significant difference in outcome between those who had undergone surgery followed by radiation versus those who had undergone radiation therapy alone. The two groups had a similar ability to ambulate after treatment, regaining of ambulation, survival time, 1-year local control rates, and motor function (105). Additionally, a systematic review and metaanalysis found that surgery followed by adjuvant radiotherapy did not show a significant benefit in terms of local control, survival, or ambulatory function in ambulatory patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (139). Thus, if patients meet the clinical and radiographic criteria in the Patchell study, they should be very strongly considered for surgical decompression followed by radiation therapy. However, even if patients do not meet the strict criteria of the Patchell study, surgery followed by radiation therapy should still be at least considered, taking into account factors such as spinal instability, biology of the tumor (radioresistant vs. radiosensitive), and prognosis. Ultimately, more randomized control trials comparing the two treatment strategies are needed to determine if surgery plus radiation therapy results in better or worse outcome than radiation therapy alone.

To date, there lacks a unified consensus on timing of surgical intervention in the setting of acute symptomatic metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Generally, guidelines and recent reviews on this topic recommend definitive surgical intervention within 24 to 48 hours of neurologic dysfunction to optimize neurologic preservation. This 48-hour window provides for potential neurologic recovery after decompression while also allowing adequate surgical planning and preparation (06). One study published a systematic review and metaanalysis evaluating appropriate timing of surgery for these patients (18). They found that urgent surgery within 48 hours of symptom onset resulted in significantly improved neurologic outcomes in patients with a life expectancy of over 3 months compared to emergent surgery within 24 hours or late surgery greater than 48 hours (18). They also found that complication rates were similar between the urgent and emergency surgery groups but lower in the urgent surgery group compared to the late surgery group. In one study, patients who present with complete paraplegia or tetraplegia for greater than 34 hours should only be offered surgery if stabilization is necessary for pain relief (146).

Choice of surgical intervention depends on the location of the tumor in regards to spinal level (cervical, thoracic, lumbar), extent of epidural compression, and location within the vertebral column (anterior or posterior column), as well as mechanical stability and overall patient prognosis. With advancement in surgical techniques, more aggressive tumor resections and reconstructions are available to address spinal cord compression, pain, and instability in appropriate candidates. Corpectomy, in which all or part of the vertebral body is removed, and spondylectomy, are techniques employed to address anterior column disease to achieve gross total tumor removal. Both approaches can be technically challenging, as the anterior column is difficult to reach. Such techniques often have longer recovery times than a posterior decompressive laminectomy and carry an additional risk of respiratory or abdominal complications. Patients undergoing corpectomy were found to have a greater 30-day postoperative complication rate, secondary to postoperative anemia and pulmonary complications compared to patients who underwent laminectomy (P< 0.0001) (07). However, paraplegic patients traditionally have not significantly improved with posterior decompressive laminectomy, but anterior vertebral body resection shows promise in paraplegic patients (123; 128; 129).

Vertebral body resection (radiograph)

Plain radiographs from a patient before (A) and after (B) vertebral body resection with anterior and posterior stabilization. (Contributed by Dr. Harry Greenberg.)

In one case series, clinical outcomes following anterior decompression in patients with a single anteriorly situated epidural metastasis are good (123). Fifty-two percent of these patients who are in good general health and have either failed radiation or have a radioresistant tumor will have improved ambulation and a median survival of 16 months (123). Operative mortality is 7%, and surgical morbidity is 11%. Spinal instability develops in 5% of patients, and recompression at the initial site will eventually occur in 22% of patients. As expected, there is a significant increase in complications and a reduction in survival for nonambulatory patients after a corpectomy (113). In other surgical series of vertebral body resection, pain improved in 60% to 97% and neurologic function in 55% to 97% (128; 34; 92). If back pain is due to vertebral involvement with spinal instability and the patient has otherwise limited metastatic disease, spinal stabilization should be strongly considered.

On the other hand, with advances in surgical technique, separation surgery and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) have also increased. Reviews of surgical trends in the treatment of MESCC has found that there is an increase in MIS techniques as well as separation surgery (95; 132). The goal of separation surgery is to circumferentially decompress the spinal cord in order to create a greater than or equal to 2 mm margin between tumor and cord, allowing for adjuvant stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). This is typically achieved with a posterior approach that may include a decompressive laminectomy with or without a unilateral or bilateral posterolateral transpedicular decompression. With this approach, there has been an overall decrease in using nonposterior approaches (95; 132).

In terms of minimally invasive surgical approaches, less invasive therapeutic approaches include percutaneous vertebroplasty and balloon-assisted kyphoplasty. This involves the injection of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) directly into the vertebral body or after expansion of the vertebral body with a balloon device. These procedures are primarily recommended in patients with pathological fractures without neurologic deficits. However, they can be considered in low grade metastatic epidural spinal cord compression patients with pathologic fractures presenting with pain and without neurologic deficits. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are minimally invasive options that can provide quick pain relief in these patients, including those with short life expectancy or who are unable to tolerate invasive surgery. Additionally, they can be combined with biopsy if pathological diagnosis is needed and radiofrequency ablation in a single procedure. One retrospective study showed a significant decrease in blood loss (P< 0.002) for patients who underwent kyphoplasty with short posterior instrumentation (n=50, mean blood loss 650 mL) compared to traditional long instrumentation (n=70, mean blood loss 2100 mL) (25). Another study compared a “mini-open approach” to the “traditional open approach” and found that the mini-open group was superior to the open group regarding estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital stay, complications, and pain score. KPS, Frankel scores, and 24-month survival were similar in both groups (148).

With the use of intraoperative spinal navigation and robotic systems, percutaneous instrumentation is another minimally invasive option for these patients that reduces blood loss and recovery time compared to open procedures. A single-institution study in Japan showed that the mean Barthel Index for activities of daily living improved from 53.5 preoperatively to 71.5 postoperatively for patients treated with minimally invasive spine stabilization using percutaneous pedicle screws (137).

Traditionally, titanium instrumentation is used in spine surgery. Carbon-fiber-reinforced polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) implants, including pedicle screw systems, were introduced. The advantages of PEEK implants include a reduction of artifact on postoperative imaging and decreased disruptive effects on photon radiation. Importantly, the radiolucency on radiographic studies allows for better evaluation of tumor recurrence on follow up and improved targeting of tumor during radiation planning. Several studies reporting on carbon PEEK implants in oncologic spine surgery have found that it is a safe and efficient option that can be considered as an alternative to titanium (135; 66).

Laser interstitial thermal therapy and cryoablation. Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is a minimally invasive technique that has been proposed as an alternative to traditional surgery for the treatment of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. One study enrolled 19 patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and no motor deficits to receive MRI-guided spinal laser interstitial thermal therapy. At 2-month follow-up, 16 of the 19 patients revealed significant decompression of the neural component, whereas three patients had progressive disease (one requiring surgery and the other two requiring repeated LITT) (134). A matched group study at a single institution compared patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression treated with open surgery (n=40) and those treated with laser interstitial thermal therapy (n=40) (29). Progression-free survival and overall survival were similar between groups. However, the laser interstitial thermal therapy cohort had a smaller postoperative decrease in the extent of epidural spinal cord compression but a lower estimated blood loss (117 vs. 1331 ml, p< 0.001), shorter hospital length of stay (3.4 vs. 9 days, p< 0.001), lower overall complication rate (5% vs. 35%, p=0.003), fewer days until radiotherapy or spinal stereotactic radiosurgery (7.8 vs. 35.9, p< 0.001), and systemic treatment (24.7 vs. 59 days, p=0.015) (29). Similarly, a separate group has published a small case series (n=7) where MRI-guided percutaneous cryoablation of vertebral metastases resulted in successful neural decompression (48). One hundred percent of patients had complete tumor ablation, and 80% had complete relief of preprocedural pain. Future studies will be needed to directly compare laser interstitial thermal therapy and imaging-guided cryoablation with traditional surgery and radiation therapy/stereotactic radiosurgery.

Of note, these modalities provide less rapid decompression of the tumor than traditional surgical techniques and, therefore, are not recommended treatments in patients with acute neurologic deficits. Additionally, with laser interstitial thermal therapy, there is theoretical concern regarding heat injury to the spinal cord that needs to be considered when planning treatment.

Radiotherapy. Before the advent of more advanced surgical techniques, radiation therapy was often the first-line treatment for patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. In current practice, radiation treatment is recommended in patients who are not surgical candidates, have a short life expectancy, have radiographic metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and are clinically asymptomatic (139), and who have undergone surgical decompression postoperatively. Various radiation treatments are available, including external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), stereotactic body radiosurgery, or stereotactic body radiotherapy.

With EBRT, radiation treatment targets the involved vertebral body as well as one level above and below, any paravertebral tumor, and the spine. A level above and below the area of metastatic involvement is commonly included in the radiation field to prevent marginal recurrence (62). However, more recent data suggest recurrence is most likely to occur at more distant sites, and utility of irradiating at a level above and below the site of involvement is being questioned (54; 71).

Response to EBRT is highly dependent on radiosensitivity of the tumor, with lymphoma, myeloma, small-cell lung cancer, breast, and prostate being radiosensitive; and kidney, colon, non-small cell lung cancer, and melanoma being more radioresistant (86; 103). Patients with radiosensitive tumors have better and longer response rates to radiation than those with radioresistant tumors. In one study, 75% of patients with radiosensitive tumors who were nonambulatory but could raise their legs antigravity became ambulant after radiotherapy, but only 34% of comparable patients with radioresistant tumors became ambulant after radiotherapy (44). Those with radiosensitive tumors have a longer duration of improvement, and in one study, they maintained motor response for 11 months compared to only 3 months in those with radioresistant tumors (87). Both radiosensitive and radioresistant tumors can have significant improvement in pain after EBRT. In one study, roughly 70% of all patients treated with EBRT achieved partial or complete regression of pain (87).

The sensitivity of the spinal cord to radiation limits the prescribed amount of therapy, and the spinal cord dose should always be calculated as well as the dose to the involved vertebral body. The incidence of permanent radiation injury to the spinal cord directly correlates with the total dose and fraction size (90). Other factors such as the presence of hypertension, advanced age, and immunocompromised state may lower the spinal cord’s tolerance to radiation therapy and increase the risk of radiation myelitis or myelopathy (121). Traditionally, stereotactic radiosurgery is only given to targets at least 2 to 3 mm from the spinal cord (74). However, a small retrospective review (n=20) revealed the use of stereotactic radiosurgery delivered to spinal metastatic lesions less than 3 mm from the spinal cord without a single case of resultant myelitis (91). This may reflect the duration of follow-up and the limited survival in this patient population. A separate phase 1 trial revealed no cases of radiation myelitis in a cohort that received a relaxed cord dmax of 16 Gy (43). Although the risk of radiation myelitis from stereotactic radiosurgery is known to be low, particularly if recommended dose metrics are followed (26), further studies will be needed to evaluate the safety of stereotactic radiosurgery at different doses and with more liberal margins of stereotactic radiosurgery delivery near the spinal cord.

The optimal dose and fractionation regimen for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression remain unknown. Each plan constructed represents a compromise between delivery of the highest dose achievable to improve tumor control, a desire to achieve palliation as expediently as possible, number of treatments (fractions), and the intrinsic radiosensitivity of the spinal cord. In fact, there may be no generally optimal plan, but consideration should be given to prognosis when deciding between a short-course versus long-course treatment (106). Dosing schedules can range from single large fractions to smaller fractions divided into a protracted treatment course. Shorter course therapy with a larger fraction size is more convenient to the patient as it requires less overall treatment time and fewer visits to the treatment center. One prospective, nonrandomized study compared short-course radiation therapy (8 Gy in 1 fraction or 20 Gy in 5 fractions) in 114 patients versus long-course radiation therapy (3 Gy in 10 fractions, 2.5 Gy in 15 fractions, or 2 Gy in 20 fractions) in 117 patients (107). The patients were similar in all common prognostic factors. This study found a significant difference in progression-free survival rates in the more protracted treatment group (at 12 months, 72% in the long-course group and 55% in the short-course group). There also was a significant difference in local control, with 77% achieving local control in the long-course group and 61% in the short-course group. There was no difference in overall survival or functional outcome. In patients with poor prognoses, outcomes after 1 × 8 Gy and 5 × 4 Gy were not significantly different. In patients with favorable prognoses, need for in-field reRT was greater after 1 × 8 Gy (101). Secondary analysis also revealed that 4 Gy × 5 appeared noninferior to 3 Gy × 10 regarding pain and distress relief (109). A similar analysis found that in patients not undergoing surgical decompression, there was no statistically significant difference in post-treatment quality of life when patients received a 10 Gy single fraction compared to receiving 20 Gy x 5 fractions (76).

Though studies suggest that a more protracted course is desirable in terms of progression-free survival and local control, secondary analysis suggests that pretreatment prognosis should be considered when selecting a treatment course. This concept supports previous findings from a randomized control trial of 300 patients with a life expectancy of less than 6 months (85). These patients were randomized to short-course therapy (8 Gy in 2 fractions) or to long-course therapy (5 Gy in 3 fractions then 3 Gy in 5 fractions). There was no difference in treatment response, duration of response, survival, or toxicity between the two groups. Thus, in general for patients with a short life expectancy, (typically less than 6 months), a short- course (typically 5 x 4 Gy over one week) of EBRT should be considered as it offers similar palliation and response, with the benefit of providing convenience to the patient in terms of overall treatment time and number of clinic visits. A single-fraction program (typically 1 x 8 Gy) may even be considered in patients with very poor prognoses. For those with a longer life expectancy and better pretreatment predicted response to EBRT (ie, favorable histology, slow progression of motor deficits, oligometastatic disease, and absence of visceral metastases), a more protracted course should be considered to offer longer progression-free survival and better local control (103; 110; 107). Typically, a regimen of ten fractions of 3 Gy is recommended in these patients (108; 145).

The most frequently used longer-course regimen is 10 fractions of 3 Gy over 2 weeks. However, a published multicenter phase 2 trial (RAMSES-01) found that metastatic epidural spinal cord compression patients treated with 15 fractions of 2.633 Gy or 18 fractions of 2.333 Gy was as well tolerated and had significantly improved local progression free survival compared to historical controls treated with 10 x 3 Gy (108). Of note, neither overall survival nor ambulatory rates were significantly different.

Stereotactic body radiosurgery (SBRS) or stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are techniques that deliver high-dose per fraction radiation to a well-defined target (143; 115; 53). With SBRS and SBRT, radiation exposure of the spinal cord and surrounding normal tissue (particularly the spinal cord) is minimized, allowing higher treatment doses. Although EBRT provides effective treatment for radiosensitive tumors, there is emerging evidence that SBRS and SBRT can provide good local control and pain relief even in those with radioresistant histologies (41). A 2016 consensus statement formulated by a panel of 15 radiation oncologists and five neurosurgeons suggested that postoperative SBRT is indicated for radio-resistant primary lesions, disease confined to one to two levels, or prior overlapping radiotherapy (111). In one series, 85 lesions were treated in 62 patients with stereotactic radiosurgery with a single fraction of SBRT (median of 16 Gy) (115). There was a 65% reduction in epidural tumor volume 2 months after treatment and an increase of 55% to 76% in thecal sac patency (115). Neurologic function improved in 81% of patients. In another study of 500 patients treated with SBRS, 65 of those treated with SBRS had no prior radiation or surgery (41). In these 65 patients, a majority achieved pain control at 1-month follow-up, and radiographic control in 90% of patients (41). No patients had evidence of neurologic symptoms due to spinal cord toxicity at follow-up ranging from 3 to 53 months (41). High doses of SBRT must be used to achieve such results, meaning that SBRT can only be used in epidural spinal cord metastases in the absence of high-grade cord compression. For that reason, it is often used postoperatively after separation surgery in cases with high-grade compression. SBRT or SBRS may also be considered in patients as adjuvant definitive treatment after surgical decompression. In a retrospective study of 187 patients with surgical decompression followed by SBRT, local tumor control was maintained in 82% of patients (73). Those who underwent high-dose single SBRT had a slightly higher recurrence rate, with 1-year progression rate of less than 10%, whereas those who received a high-dose hypofractionated course had a 1-year progression rate of less than 5% (73). SBRS or SBRT can be considered definitive treatment either alone or following surgical decompression. The authors from this study advocate for “hybrid therapy” (73), where separation surgery followed by concomitant stereotactic radiosurgery is a superior approach to traditional laminectomy followed by stereotactic radiosurgery, as the former provides safer margins for stereotactic radiosurgery delivery (11).

As discussed, SBRT delivers a higher biologically equivalent dose of radiation, which results in superior local control. This is routinely recommended in cases where there is space between the epidural disease and spinal cord. Thus, it is not typically employed in patients with high grade metastatic epidural spinal cord compression . However, a study published a series of patients with high grade metastatic epidural spinal cord compression who were treated with SBRT (97). These patients were either nonsurgical candidates or underwent surgery without successful Bilsky downgrading (meaning postsurgical Bilsky grade greater than or equal to 2). They found a local control rate of 92.5% following treatment, which was comparable to other series. At the short-term 3-month follow-up, they found 45.5% of patients had complete pain relief, and 17.8% had improved ambulatory status.

In recurrent epidural spinal cord compression, SBRT or SBRS, EBRT, surgery, or chemotherapy may be considered. A second course of palliative EBRT has been used to treat recurrent same-segment spinal cord compression, with 74% of patients found to be ambulatory at the onset of reirradiation and 78% on completion of radiation therapy (120). Sixty-nine percent were ambulatory for a median duration of 4.7 months following completion of reirradiation, and the median survival was 4.2 months. Reirradiation carries minimal risk of radiation myelopathy for patients with progressive recurrent epidural disease. As mentioned above, in Gerszten and colleagues’ 2007 study of 500 patients treated with SBRS, 344 had recurrent disease previously treated with EBRT. Of this subset of 344 patients, 86% achieved long-term radiographic control and pain control, and none demonstrated evidence of spinal cord toxicity (41). If patients develop a neurologic deficit during radiation therapy and the deficit is unresponsive to steroid dose increase, a directed surgical approach can be considered. In the 2005 Patchell study, these patients did less well than those who underwent initial surgical intervention.

Several small investigations regarding the use of computed tomography-guided iodine-125 seed implantation therapy as an alternative palliative measure for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression found the intervention to be safe (n=28) with no neurologic sequelae (82) and efficacious at relieving pain, as the Numerical Rating Scale (which assesses the degree of pain) scores before implantation and at postoperative 3 and 6 months were 7.81±0.74, 2.04±1.10, and 1.81±0.79, respectively, (P< 0.05). Further, KPS scores before treatment and at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively were 66.30±6.88, 85.93±9.31, and 87.91±8.56, respectively (P< 0.05) (56). Median survival time in this cohort was 10 months, with an 82% response rate (80). Randomized controlled trials are needed to directly compare the clinical efficacy of computed tomography-guided radioactive iodine-125 seed implantation with other already accepted methods (discussed above) in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.

Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) is not considered routine for spinal metastasis but has been described in the recent literature in combination with kyphoplasty or spinal surgery in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (116; 142; 72). Typically, adjuvant radiation therapy is delayed a few weeks to allow for surgical wound healing. IORT allows for earlier delivery of radiation treatment, which can improve tumor control. One study detailed their treatment protocol for single session spinal stabilization with IORT during which patients with MESCC grade 1 to 3 received 8 Gy isodoses over an average radiation time of 5 minutes (72). Criteria were strict. Patients with back pain and SINS score greater than or equal to 7 were included. Patients with neurologic deficits, acute cord compression, or tumor extension into the posterior elements were not candidates for IORT. Further studies and detailed protocols are needed in this area.

Chemotherapy. Chemotherapy may have a place in treating patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. The use of chemotherapy relies on the chemosensitivity of the tumor. Chemotherapy can be considered for patients who have chemosensitive tumors but is often used as an adjuvant therapy combined with radiation or surgery. However, some patients with extremely chemosensitive tumors can have an excellent response with chemotherapy alone and may not require other definitive treatments. In one study, 20 of 23 patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression secondary to breast cancer who were treated primarily with chemotherapy experienced a resolution of signs and symptoms (51). Chemotherapy alone has had the most success in patients who are treated early and in those with tumors such as germ cell and hematological malignancies (144; 39). A plasmacytoma was found to be responsive to a combination of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (89). Chemotherapy may also be considered for patients who have already received radiation or surgery and are not candidates for either treatment. Complete resolution of paraparesis following intravenous chemotherapy has been reported in patients with breast cancer who have failed radiation (17).

Immunotherapy. Per trends in medical oncology, immunotherapy use is increasing, particularly immune checkpoint blockade, to treat several cancers. One study revealed that the use of radiation therapy to treat vertebral metastatic disease is well tolerated in patients on a PD-1 inhibitor. Numbness and weakness were more likely to improve in patients who received radiation therapy after starting treatment with a PD-1 inhibitor when compared to patients who received radiation therapy before starting treatment with a PD-1 inhibitor (71% v 17%, P=0.04) (32). Of note, most patients in this study did not have epidural spinal cord compression (n=12/37) but instead had spine metastases without cord compression. Future studies will be needed to further assess immunotherapy used for cancers that are causing metastatic epidural spinal cord compression.

Rehabilitative care. Most patients with metastatic cord compression regain some function compared to patients with ischemic or traumatic spinal cord injury (75). During acute hospitalization, patients should be mobilized as soon as possible to avoid complications of immobility. A physical medicine and rehabilitation specialist should be involved in coordinating patient care. Management of bowel and bladder dysfunction should also be managed appropriately. Patients experiencing urinary retention should have scheduled straight catheterization, whereas those with sphincter incontinence should receive regular-timed voiding and bladder training (75). Bowel regimens for retention should include an osmotic agent (polyethylene glycol) combined with motility agents (senna). For fecal incontinence, bulking agents such as psyllium should be implemented (75). Additionally, patients with compromised sensation require pressure-relieving bedding and regular weight shifts to protect areas prone to breakdown, such as calcanei and ischial tuberosities (75).

Media

References

01: Abrahm JL, Banffy MB, Harris MB. Spinal cord compression in patients with advanced metastatic cancer: “All I care about is walking and living my life”. JAMA 2008;299:937-46. PMID 18314436
02: Ahmed AK, Goodwin CR, Heravi A, et al. Predicting survival for metastatic spine disease: a comparison of nine scoring systems. Spine J 2018;18(10):1804-14. PMID 29567516
03: Akanda ZZ, McKay MJ. Narrative review-diagnosing and managing malignant epidural spinal cord compression: an evidence-based approach. Ann Transl Med 2023;11(11):386. PMID 37970608
04: Amelot A, Balabaud L, Choi D, et al. Surgery for metastatic spine tumors in the elderly. Advanced age is not a contraindication to surgery! Spine J 2017;17(6):759-67. PMID 26239762
05: Amelot A, Terrier LM, Cristini J, et al. Spinal metastases from lung cancer: survival depends only on genotype, neurological and personal status, scarcely of surgical resection. Surg Oncol 2020;34:51-56. PMID 32891353
06: Amelot A, Terrier LM, Farah K, et al. Impact of metastic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and pathological vertebral compression fracture (pVCF) in neurological and survival prognosis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2024;50(2):107935. PMID 38199005
07: Azad TD, Varshneya K, Ho AL, Verravagu A, Sciubba DM, Ratliff JK. Laminectomy versus corpectomy for spinal metastatic disease-complications, costs, and quality outcomes. World Neurosurg 2019;131:e468-73. PMID 31404695
08: Bach F, Larsen BH, Rohde K, et al. Metastatic spinal cord compression. Occurrence, symptoms, clinical presentations and prognosis in 398 patients with spinal cord compression. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1990;107(1-2):37-43. PMID 2096606
09: Barron KD, Hirano A, Araki S, Terry RD. Experiences with metastatic neoplasms involving the spinal cord. Neurology 1959;9:91-106. PMID 13622902
10: Bartels RH, Ruiter Gd, Feuth T, Arts MP. Prediction of life expectancy in patients with spinal epidural metastasis. Neuro Oncol 2016;18(1): 114-8. PMID 26254478
11: Barzilai O, Laufer I, Robin A, Xu R, Yamada Y, Bilsky MH. Hybrid therapy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: technique for separation surgery and spine radiosurgery. Open Neurosurg (Hagersown) 2019b;16(3):310-8. PMID 29889256
12: Barzilai O, Versteeg AL, Goodwin CR, et al. Association of neurologic deficits with surgical outcomes and health-related quality of life after treatment for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Cancer 2019a;125(23):4224-31. PMID 31410854
13: Batara JF, Grossman SA, Gokaslan Z. Role for surgery in epidural cord compressions. Neuro-Oncol 2004;6:370.
14: Bendfeldt GA, Chanbour H, Chen JW, et al. Does low-grade versus high-grade Bilsky score influence local recurrence and overall survival in metastatic spine tumor surgery?. Neurosurgery 2023;93(6):1319-30. PMID 37477422
15: Bilsky MH, Laufer I, Fourney DR, et al. Reliability analysis of epidural spinal cord compression. J Neurosug Spine 2010;13(3):324-8. PMID 20809724
16: Bilsky M, Smith M. Surgical approach to epidural spinal cord compression. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2006;20(6):1307-17. PMID 17113465
17: Boogerd W, van der Sande JJ, Kroger R, Bruning PF, Somers R. Effective systemic therapy for spinal epidural metastases from breast carcinoma. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1989;25:149-53. PMID 2920764
18: Bresolin N, Sartori L, Drago G, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis on optimal timing of surgery for acute symptomatic metastatic spinal cord compression. Medicina (Kaunas) 2024;60(4):631. PMID 38674277
19: Brice J, McKissock W. Surgical treatment of malignant extradural spinal tumors. Br Med J 1965;1:1341-6. PMID 14280299
20: Byrne TN, Waxman SG. Spinal cord compression: diagnosis and principles of management. Contemporary neurology series. Philadelphia: FA Davis, 1990.
21: Cao X, Jiang W, Zhao X, et al. Development of a novel 12-point grading system for evaluating epidural spinal cord compression and its clinical implications. Spine J 2023;23(12):1858-68. PMID 37499881
22: Cassidy JT, Baker JF, Lenehan B. The role of prognostic scoring systems in assessing surgical candidacy for patients with vertebral metastasis: a narrative review. Global Spine J 2018;8(6):638-51. PMID 30202719
23: Chaichana KL, Woodworth GF, Sciubba DM, et al. Predictors of ambulatory function after decompressive surgery for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Neurosurgery 2008;62:683-92. PMID 18425015
24: Chamberlain MC. Neoplastic meningitis and metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2012;26(4):917-31. PMID 22794290
25: Chang CW, Fu TS, Lin DY, et al. Percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty and short instrumentation compared with traditional long instrumentation for thoracolumbar metastatic spinal cord compression. World Neurosurg 2019;130:e640-7. PMID 31276852
26: Chang JH, Shin JH, Yamada YJ, et al. Stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastases: what are the risks and how do we minimize them? Spine 2016;41 Suppl 20:S238-45. PMID 27488294
27: Cole JS, Patchell RA. Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Lancet Neurol 2008;7(5):459-66. PMID 18420159
28: Dakson A, Leck E, Brandman DM, Christie SD. The clinical utility of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) system in spinal epidural metastases: a retrospective study. Spinal Cord 2020;58(8):892-9 PMID 32047252
29: de Almeida Bastos DC, Everson RG, de Oliveira Santos BF, et al. A comparison of spinal laser interstitial thermotherapy with open surgery for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. J Neurosurg Spine 2020:1-9. PMID 31899882
30: Delattre JY, Arbit E, Thaler HT, Rosenblum MK, Posner JB. A dose response study of dexamethasone in a model of spinal cord compression caused by epidural tumor. J Neurosurg 1989;70:920-5. PMID 2715820
31: Elsberg CA. Extradural spinal tumors--primary, secondary, metastatic. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1928;46(1):1-20.
32: Fareed MM, Pike LRG, Bang A, et al. Palliative radiation therapy for vertebral metastases and metastatic cord compression in patients treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. Front Oncol 2019;9:199. PMID 30984622
33: Fehlings MG, Nater A, Tetreault L, et al. Survival and clinical outcomes in surgically treated patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: results of the prospective multicenter AOSpine Study. J Clin Oncol 2016;34(3):268-76. PMID 26598751
34: Findlay GF. The role of vertebral body collapse in the management of malignant spinal cord compression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987;50:151-4. PMID 3572429
35: Fisher CG, DiPaola CP, Ryken TC, et al. A novel classification system for spinal instability in neoplastic disease: an evidence-based approach and expert consensus from the Spine Oncology Study Group. Spine (Phila PA 1976) 2010;35(22):E1221-9. PMID 20562730
36: Fisher CG, Schouten R, Versteeg AL, et al. Reliability of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) among radiation oncologists: an assessment of instability secondary to spinal metastases. Radiat Oncol 20144;9:69. PMID 24594004
37: Fox S, Spiess M, Hnenny L, Fourney DR. Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS): reliability among spine fellows and resident physicians in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery. Global Spine J 2017;7(8):744-8. PMID 29238637
38: Fridley JS, Syed S, Niu T, Leary OP, Gokaslan ZL. Presentation of spinal cord and column tumors. Neurooncol Pract 2020;7(Suppl 1):i18-24. PMID 33299570
39: Gale J, Mead GM, Simmonds PD. Management of spinal cord and cauda equina compression secondary to epidural metastatic disease in adults with malignant germ cell tumours. Clin Oncol 2002;14:481-90. PMID 12512971
40: George R, Jeba J, Ramkumar G, Chacko AG, Leng M, Tharyan P. Interventions for the treatment of metastatic extradural spinal cord compression in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Review 2008;(4):CD006716. PMID 18843728
41: Gerszten PC, Burton SA, Ozhasoglu C, Welch WC. Radiosurgery for spinal metastases: clinical experience in 500 cases from a single institution. Spine 2007;32(2):193-9. PMID 17224814
42: Gerszten PC, Mendel E, Yamada Y. Radiotherapy and radiosurgery for metastatic spine disease: what are the options, indications, and outcomes. Spine 2009;34(22 Suppl):S78-92. PMID 19829280
43: Ghia AJ, Guha-Thakurta N, Hess K, et al. Phase 1 study of spinal cord constraint relaxation with single session spine stereotactic radiosurgery in the primary management of patients with inoperable, previously unirradiated metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018;102(5):1481-8. PMID 30099131
44: Gilbert RW, Kim JH, Posner JB. Epidural spinal cord compression from metastatic tumor: diagnosis and treatment. Ann Neurol 1978;3:40-51. PMID 655653
45: Gledhill RF, Harrison BM, McDonald WI. Demyelination and remyelination after acute spinal cord compression. Exp Neurol 1973;38:472-87. PMID 4696114
46: Graham PH, Capp A, Delaney G, et al. A pilot randomised comparison of dexamethasone 96 mg vs 16 mg per day for malignant spinal-cord compression treated by radiotherapy: TROG 01.05 Superdex study. Clin Oncol 2006;18(1):70-6. PMID 16477923
47: Greenberg HS, Kim JH, Posner JB. Epidural spinal cord compression from metastatic tumors: results with a new treatment protocol. Ann Neurol 1980;8:361-6. PMID 7436380
48: Guenette JP, Tuncali K, Himes N, Tatli S, Lee TC. Spine cryoablation: a multimodality image-guided approach for tumors adjacent to major neural elements. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37(12):2396-9. PMID 27609619
49: Hagenau C, Grosh W, Currie M, Wiley RG. Comparison of spinal magnetic resonance imaging and myelography in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1987;5(10):1663-9. PMID 3655863
50: Hainline B, Tuszynski MH, Posner JB. Ataxia in epidural spinal cord compression. Neurology 1992;42(11):2193-5. PMID 1436534
51: Hankenson R, Nevinny H, Hankesnon A, et al. Malignant epidural spinal cord compression in breast cancer. Proc Ann Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol 1993;12:A144.
52: Heimdal K, Hirschberg H, Slettebo H, Watne K, Nome O. High incidence of serious side effects of high-dose dexamethasone treatment in patients with epidural spinal cord compression. J Neurooncol 1992;12(2):141-4. PMID 1560260
53: Helissey C, Levy A, Jacob J, et al. External beam radiotherapy in the management of spinal metastases: review of current strategies and perspectives for highly conformal irradiation modalities. Discov Med 2011;11(61):505-11. PMID 21712016
54: Helweg-Larsen S, Rasmusson B, Sorensen PS. Recovery of gait after radiotherapy in paralytic patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Neurology 1990;40(8):1234-6. PMID 2381531
55: Helweg-Larsen S, Sorensen PS, Kreiner S. Prognostic factors in metastatic spinal cord compression: a prospective study using multivariate analysis of variables influencing survival and gait function in 153 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;46(5):1163-9. PMID 10725627
56: Huang H, Li FS, Wang L, Du ZG, Xu XN. Relief effect of CT-guided (125)I seed implantation on patients with spinal and paraspinal osteolytic metastatic tumors [Article in Chinese]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2017;39(3):220-4. PMID 28316224
57: Husband DJ. Malignant spinal cord compression: prospective study of delays in referral and treatment. BMJ 1998;317(7150):18-21. PMID 9651261
58: Husband DJ, Grant KA, Romaniuk CS. MRI in the diagnosis and treatment of suspected malignant spinal cord compression. Br J Radiol 2001;74(877):15-23. PMID 11227772
59: Ito K, Nihei K, Shimizuguchi T, et al. Postoperative re-irradiation using stereotactic body radiotherapy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. J Neurosurg Spine 2018;29(3):332-8. PMID 29905524
60: Ivanishvili Z, Fourney DR. Incorporating the spine instability neoplastic score into a treatment strategy for spinal metastasis: LMNOP. Global Spine J 2014;4(2):129-36. PMID 25054100
61: Jellema K, Canta LR, Tijssen CC, van Rooij WJ, Koudstaal PJ, van Gijn J. Spinal dural arteriovenous fistulas: clinical features in 80 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2003;74(10):1438-40. PMID 14570843
62: Kaminski HJ, Diwan VG, Ruff RL. Second occurrence of spinal epidural metastases. Neurology 1991;41(5):744-6. PMID 2027494
63: Kaplan ID, Valdagni R, Cox RS, Bagshaw MA. Reduction of spinal metastases after preemptive irradiation in prostatic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1990;18:1019-25. PMID 2347712
64: Karhade AV, Shin JH, Schwab JH. Prognostic models for spinal metastatic disease: evolution of methodologies, limitations, and future opportunities. Ann Transl Med 2019;7(10):219. PMID 31297384
65: Katagiri H, Takahashi M, Inagaki J, et al. Clinical results of nonsurgical treatment for spinal metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998;42(5):1127-32. PMID 9869239
66: Khan HA, Ber R, Neifert SN, et al. Carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK spinal implants for primary and metastatic spine tumors: a systematic review on implant complications and radiotherapy benefits. J Neurosurg Spine 2023;39(4):534-47. PMID 37382293
67: Kienstra GE, Terwee CB, Dekker FW, et al. Prediction of spinal epidural metastases. Arch Neurol 2000;57(5):690-5. PMID 10815135
68: Kim JK, Learch TJ, Colletti PM, Lee JW, Tran SD, Terk MR. Diagnosis of vertebral metastasis, epidural metastasis, and malignant spinal cord compression: are T(1)-weighted sagittal images sufficient. Magn Reson Imaging 2000;18(7):819-24. PMID 11027875
69: Kim RY, Smith JW, Spencer SA, Meredith RF, Salter MM. Malignant epidural spinal cord compression associated with a paravertebral mass: its radiotherapeutic outcome on radiosensitivity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993;27:1079-83. PMID 8262831
70: Klein SL, Sanford RA, Muhlbauer MS. Pediatric spinal epidural metastases. J Neurosurg 1991;74:70-5. PMID 1845814
71: Klish DS, Grossman P, Allen PK, Rhines LD, Chang EL. Irradiation of spinal metastases: should we continue to include one uninvolved vertebral body above and below the radiation field. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;81(5):1495-9. PMID 21074335
72: Krauss P, Wolfert CL, Sommer B, et al. Intraoperative radiotherapy combined with spinal stabilization surgery-a novel treatment strategy for spinal metastases based on a first single-center experiences. J Neurooncol 2024;168(3):445-55. PMID 38652400
73: Laufer I, Iorgulescu JB, Chapman T, et al. Local disease control for spinal metastases following “separation surgery” and adjuvant hypofractionated or high-dose single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery: outcome analysis in 186 patients. J Neurosurg Spine 2013a;18(3):207-14. PMID 23339593
74: Laufer I, Rubin DG, Lis E, et al. The NOMS framework: approach to the treatment of spinal metastatic tumors. Oncologist 2013b;18(6):744-51. PMID 23709750
75: Lawton, AJ, Lee, K, Cheville, A, et al. Assessment and management of patients with metastatic spinal cord compression: a multidisciplinary review. J Clin Oncol 2019;37(1):61-71. PMID 30395488
76: Lee KA, Dunne M, Small C, et al. (ICORG 05-03): prospective randomized non-inferiority phase III trial comparing two radiation schedules in malignant spinal cord compression (not proceeding with surgical decompression); the quality of life analysis. Acta Oncol 2018;57(7):965-72. PMID 29419331
77: Lei M, Liu S, Yang S, Liu Y, Wang C, Gao H. New imaging characteristics for predicting postoperative neurologic status in patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. A retrospective analysis of 81 cases. Spine 2017;17(6):814-20. PMID 28034746
78: Levack P, Graham J, Collie D, et al. Don’t wait for a sensory level--listen to the symptoms: a prospective audit of the delays in diagnosis of malignant cord compression. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2002;14(6):472-80. PMID 12512970
79: Li KC, Poon PY. Sensitivity and specificity of MRI in detecting malignant spinal cord compression and in distinguishing malignant from benign compression fractures of vertebrae. Magn Reson Imaging 1988;6(5):547-56. PMID 3067022
80: Liu Y, He C, Li Y, et al. Clinical efficacy of computed tomography-guided iodine-125 seed implantation therapy for patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a retrospective study. J Cancer Res Ther 2019;15(4):807-12. PMID 31436235
81: Loblaw DA, Laperriere NJ, Mackillop WJ. Population-based study of malignant spinal cord compression in Ontario. Clin Oncol 2003;15(4):211-7. PMID 12846501
82: Lu J, Huang W, Gong J, et al. The safety and efficacy of interstitial 125I seed implantation brachytherapy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. J Cancer Res Ther 2018;14(7):1549-55. PMID 30589037
83: Luetmer PH, Lane JI, Gilbertson JR, Bernstein MA, Huston J 3rd, Atkinson JL. Preangiographic evaluation of spinal dural arteriovenous fistulas with elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography and effect on radiation dose and volume of iodinated contrast material. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26(4):711-8. PMID 15814910
84: Mak KS, Lee LK, Mak RH, et al. Incidence and treatment patterns in hospitalizations for malignant spinal cord compression in the United States, 1998-2006. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;80(3):824-31. PMID 20630663
85: Maranzano E, Bellavita R, Rossi R, et al. Short-course versus split-course radiotherapy in metastatic spinal cord compression: results of a phase III, randomized, multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(15):3358-65. PMID 15738534
86: Maranzano E, Latini P. Effectiveness of radiation therapy without surgery in metastatic spinal cord compression: final results from a prospective trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995;32(4):959-67. PMID 7607970
87: Maranzano E, Latini P, Beneventi S, et al. Comparison of two different radiotherapy schedules for spinal cord compression in prostate cancer. Tumori 1998;84(4):472-7. PMID 9824999
88: Maranzano E, Latini P, Beneventi S, et al. Radiotherapy without steroids in selected metastatic spinal cord compression patients. A phase II trial. Am J Clin Oncol 1996;19(2):179-83. PMID 8610645
89: Martio AE, Miotto GJ, Filo PMM, et al. Epidural extramedullary plasmacytoma successfully treated with surgical excision and bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone. Curr Health Sci J 2023;49(2):288-92. PMID 37786620
90: McCuniff AJ, Liang MJ. Radiation tolerance of the cervical spinal cord. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989;16:675-8. PMID 2921166
91: Meleis A, Jhawar SR, Weiner JP, et al. Stereotactic body radiation therapy in nonsurgical patients with metastatic spinal disease and epidural compression: a retrospective review. World Neurosurg 2019;122:e198-e205. PMID 30308345
92: Moore AJ, Uttley D. Anterior decompression and stabilization of the spine in malignant disease. Neurosurgery 1989;24:713-7. PMID 2716980
93: Murotani K, Fujibayashi S, Otsuki B, et al. Prognostic factors after surgical treatment for spinal metastases. Asian Spine J 2024;18(3):390-7. PMID 38764228
94: Murtaza H, Sullivan C. Classifications in brief: the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2019;477(12):2798-803. PMID 31764353
95: Orenday-Barraza JM, Cavagnaro MJ, Avila MJ, et al. 10-year trends in the surgical management of patients with spinal metastases: a scoping review. World Neurosurg 2022;157:170-86.e3. PMID 34655822
96: Patchell R, Tibbs PA, Regine WF, et al. Direct decompressive surgical resection in the treatment of spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet 2005;366(9486):643-48. PMID 16112300
97: Patel PP, Cao Y, Chen X, et al. Oncologic and functional outcomes after stereotactic body radiation therapy for high-grade malignant spinal cord compression. Adv Radiat Oncol 2023;9(1):101327. PMID 38260225
98: Paton GR, Frangou E, Fourney DR. Contemporary treatment strategy for spinal metastasis: the "LMNOP" system. Can J Neurol Sci 2011;38(3):396-403. PMID 21515496
99: Perrin RG. Metastatic tumors of the axial spine. Curr Opin Oncol 1992;4(3):525-32. PMID 1379832
100: Posner JB. Neurologic complications of cancer. Philadelphia: FA Davis, 1995.
101: Rades D, Conde-Moreno AJ, Caciedo J, et al. 1x8 Gy versus 5x4 Gy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a matched-pair study of three prognostic patient subgroups. Radiat Oncol 2018;13(1):21. PMID 29422106
102: Rades D, Douglas S, Veninga T, et al. Validation and simplification of score predicting survival in patients irradiated for metastatic spinal cord compression. Cancer 2010a;116(15):3670-3. PMID 20564129
103: Rades D, Fehlauer F, Schulte R, et al. Prognostic factors for local control and survival after radiotherapy of metastatic spinal cord compression. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(21):3388-93. PMID 16849752
104: Rades D, Heidenreich F, Karstens JH. Final results of a prospective study of the prognostic value of the time to develop motor deficits before irradiation in metastatic spinal cord compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002a;53(4):975-9. PMID 12095565
105: Rades D, Huttenlocher S, Dunst J, et al. Matched pair analysis comparing surgery followed by radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone for metastatic spinal cord compression. J Clin Oncol 2010b;28(22):3597-604. PMID 20606090
106: Rades D, Karstens JH, Alberti W. Role of radiotherapy in the treatment of motor dysfunction due to metastatic spinal cord compression: comparison of three different fractionation schedules. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002b;54:1160-4. PMID 12419444
107: Rades D, Lange M, Veninga T, et al. Preliminary results of spinal cord compression recurrence evaluation (score-1) study comparing short-course versus long-course radiotherapy for local control of malignant epidural spinal cord compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73(1):228-34. PMID 18539406
108: Rades D, Lomidze D, Jankarashvili N, et al. Radiotherapy for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression with increased doses: Final Results of the RAMSES-01 Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2024;16(6):1149. PMID 38539484
109: Rades D, Segedin B, Conde-Moreno AJ, et al. Patient-reported outcomes-secondary analysis of the SCORE-2 trial comparing 4 Gy × 5 to 3 Gy × 10 for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2019;105(4):760-4. PMID 31415797
110: Rades D, Veninga T, Stalpers LJ, et al. Outcome after radiotherapy alone for metastatic spinal cord compression in patients with oligometastases. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(1):50-6. PMID 17194905
111: Redmond KJ, Lo SS, Soltus SG, et al. Consensus guidelines for postoperative stereotactic body radiation therapy for spinal metastases: results of an international survey. J Neurosurg Spine 2017;26(3):299-306. PMID 27834628
112: Ropper AE, Ropper AH. Acute spinal cord compression. N Engl J Med 2017;376:1358-69. PMID 28379788
113: Roser S, Maharaj MM, Taylor MA, Kuru R, Hansen MA, Ferch R. Vertebrectomy in metastatic spinal tumours: A 10 year, single-centre review of outcomes and survival. J Clin Neurosci 2019;68:218-23. PMID 31331749
114: Ruff RL, Dougherty JH. Complications of lumbar puncture followed by anticoagulation. Stroke 1981;12:879-81. PMID 7303081
115: Ryu S, Rock J, Jain R, et al. Radiosurgical decompression of metastatic epidural compression. Cancer 2010;116(9):2250-7. PMID 20209611
116: Saito T, Kondo T, Hozumi T, Karasawa K, Seichi A, Nakamura K. Results of posterior surgery with intraoperative radiotherapy for spinal metastases. Eur Spine J 2006;15(2):216-22. PMID 16133075
117: Salazar-Mejia CE, Llerena-Hernanez E, Hernandez-Barajas D, et al. Malignant spinal cord compression syndrem as an initial presentation of testicular cancer. Case Rep Oncol Med 2018;2018:5757434. PMID 30402313
118: Schiff D, O’Neill BP, Suman VJ. Spinal epidural metastasis as the initial manifestation of malignancy: Clinical features and diagnostic approach. Neurology 1997;49:452-6. PMID 9270576
119: Schiff D, O’Neill BP, Wang CH, O’Fallon JR. Neuroimaging and treatment implications of patients with multiple epidural spinal metastases. Cancer 1998;83(8):1593-601. PMID 9781953
120: Schiff D, Shaw EG, Cascino TL. Outcome after spinal reirradiation for malignant epidural spinal cord compression. Ann Neurol 1995;37:583-9. PMID 7755352
121: Sherman J, Aregawi DG, Shaffrey ME, Schiff D. Spinal metastases. In: Schiff D, Kesari S, Wen PY, editors. Cancer neurology in clinical practice, 2nd ed. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2008:163-79.
122: Siegal T, Sholami E, Shapira Y, Siegal TZ. Indomethacin and dexamethasone treatment in experimental neoplastic spinal cord compression: part II. Effect on edema and prostaglandin synthesis. Neurosurgery 1988;22:334-9. PMID 3162557
123: Siegal T, Siegal TZ. Surgical decompression of anterior and posterior malignant epidural tumors compressing the spinal cord: a prospective study. Neurosurgery 1985;17:424-32. PMID 4047353
124: Soerdjbalie-Maikoe V, Pelger RC, Lycklama à Nijeholt GA, et al. Strontium-89 (Metastron) and the bisphosphonate olpadronate reduce the incidence of spinal cord compression in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer metastatic to the skeleton. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29(4):494-8. PMID 11914887
125: Sorensen S, Helweg-Larsen S, Mouridsen H, Hansen HH. Effect of high-dose dexamethasone in carcinomatous metastatic spinal cord compression treated with radiotherapy: a randomized trial. Eur J Cancer 1994;30A(1):22. PMID 8142159
126: Spinazze S, Caraceni A, Schrijvers D. Epidural spinal cord compression. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2005;56(3):397-406. PMID 16310372
127: Stark RJ, Henson RA, Evans SJ. Spinal metastasis: a retrospective survey from a general hospital. Brain 1982;105:189-213. PMID 7066672
128: Sundaresan N, Galicich JH, Lane JM, Bains MS, McCormack P. Treatment of neoplastic epidural cord compression by vertebral body resection and stabilization. J Neurosurg 1985;63:676-84. PMID 4056870
129: Sundaresan N, Sachdev VP, Holland JF, et al. Surgical treatment of spinal cord compression from epidural metastasis. J Clin Oncol 1995;13(9):2330-5. PMID 7666091
130: Sutcliffe P, Connock M, Shyangdan D, Court R, Kandala NB, Clarke A. A systematic review of evidence on malignant spinal metastases: natural history and technologies for identifying patients at high risk of vertebral fracture and spinal cord compression. Health Technol Assess 2013;17(42):1-274. PMID 24070110
131: Tabouret E, Cauvin C, Fuentes S, et al. Reassessment of scoring systems and prognostic factors for metastatic spinal cord compression. Spine J 2015;15(5):944-50. PMID 24120144
132: Tan JHJ, Hallinan JTPD, Lee R, et al. Trends in surgical management of spinal metastases in a Singaporean tertiary referral center: a 17-year retrospective review. Front Oncol 2023;13:1297553. PMID 38074672
133: Tateiwa D, Oshima K, Nakai T, et al. Clinical outcomes and significant factors in the survival rate after decompression surgery for patients who were non-ambulatory due to spinal metastases. J Orthop Sci 2019;24(2):347-52. PMID 30482604
134: Tatsui CE, Lee SH, Amini B, et al. Spinal laser interstitial thermal therapy: a novel alternative to surgery for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Neurosurgery 2016;79 Suppl 1:S73-S82. PMID 27861327
135: Trungu S, Ricciardi L, Forcato S, et al. Anterior corpectomy and plating with carbon-PEEK instrumentation for cervical spinal metastases: clinical and radiological outcomes. J Clin Med 2021;10(24):5910. PMID 34945214
136: Uei H, Tokuhashi Y, Maseda M. Analysis of the relationship between the Epidural Spinal Cord Compression (ESCC) Scale and paralysis caused by metastatic spine tumors. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2018;43(8):E448-55. PMID 28816824
137: Uei H, Tokuhashi Y, Oshima M, et al. Clinical results of minimally invasive spine stabilization for spinal metastases. Orthopedics 2017;40(4):e693-8. PMID 28558111
138: Ushio Y, Posner R, Posner JB, Shapiro WR. Experimental spinal cord compression by epidural neoplasms. Neurology 1977;27:422-9. PMID 558545
139: Van den Brande R, Thijs D, Bilsky M, Peeters M, Billiet C, Van de Kelft E. Treatment of ambulatory patients with metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine 2023;40(2):175-84. PMID 37890190
140: van der Sande JJ, Kroger R, Boogerd W. Multiple spinal epidural metastases: an unexpectedly frequent finding. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990;53:1001-3. PMID 2283511
141: Vecht CJ, Haaxma-Reiche H, van Putten WL, de Visser M, Vries EP, Twijnstra A. Initial bolus of conventional versus high-dose dexamethasone in metastatic spinal cord compression. Neurology 1989;39(9):1255-7. PMID 2771077
142: Wenz F, Schneider F, Neumaier C, et al. Kypho-IORT--a novel approach of intraoperative radiotherapy during kyphoplasty for vertebral metastases. Radiat Oncol 2010;5:11. PMID 20149237
143: Witham TF, Khavkin YA, Gallia GL, Wolinsky JP, Gokaslan ZL. Surgery insight: current management of epidural spinal cord compression from metastatic spine disease. Nat Clin Pract Neurol 2006;2(2):87-94. PMID 16932530
144: Wong ET, Portlock CS, O'Brien JP, DeAngelis LM. Chemosensitive epidural spinal cord disease in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Neurology 1996;46:1543-7. PMID 8649545
145: Yaouanq M, Gibson N, Boudoussier A, et al. Emergency radiation therapy in modern-day practice: Now or never, or never again? Support Care Cancer 2024;32(2):114. PMID 38240886
146: Yu W, Chen D, Ding X, et al. A critical appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on surgical treatments for spinal metastasis. Eur Spine J 2024;33(5):1868-98. PMID 38407614
147: Zaidat OO, Ruff RL. Treatment of spinal epidural metastasis improves patient survival and functional state. Neurology 2002;58(9):1360-6. PMID 12011281
148: Zhou X, Cui H, He Y, Qiu G, Zhou D, Liu Y. Treatment of spinal metastases with epidural cord compression through corpectomy and reconstruction via the traditional open approach versus the mini-open approach: a multicenter retrospective study. J Oncol 2019;7904740. PMID 31186639

Contributors

All contributors' financial relationships have been reviewed and mitigated to ensure that this and every other article is free from commercial bias.

Authors

Deric M Park MD FACP

Dr. Park of Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.
See Profile
Elizabeth Ginalis MD

Dr. Ginalis of Rutgers New Jersey Medical School has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.
See Profile

Former Authors

Harry S Greenberg MD
David Schiff MD
Kathryn Nevel MD
John T Fortunato MD
Rimas V Lukas MD
Huy Tram N Nguyen MD
Yasmine Alkhalid MD

Patient Profile

Age range of presentation: Typical:

Atypical: 0 month to 65+ years
Sex preponderance: male=female
Heredity: none
Population groups selectively affected: none selectively affected
Occupation groups selectively affected: none selectively affected

ICD & OMIM codes

ICD-10: Malignant neoplasm of central nervous system, unspecified: C72.9
ICD-11: Malignant neoplasm metastasis in spinal cord, cranial nerves or remaining parts of central nervous system: 2D52

Malignant neoplasms, stated or presumed to be primary, of specified sites, except of lymphoid, haematopoietic, central nervous system or related tissues, unspecified: 2D3Z

Other specified malignant neoplasms, stated or presumed to be primary, of specified sites, except of lymphoid, haematopoietic, central nervous system or related tissues: 2D3Y
ICD-O: Neoplasm, metastatic: M-8000/6

This is an article preview.
Start a Free Account
to access the full version.

Nearly 3,000 illustrations, including video clips of neurologic disorders.
Every article is reviewed by our esteemed Editorial Board for accuracy and currency.
Full spectrum of neurology in 1,200 comprehensive articles.
Listen to MedLink on the go with Audio versions of each article.

Questions or Comment?

MedLink, LLC

3525 Del Mar Heights Rd, Ste 304
San Diego, CA 92130-2122

Toll Free (U.S. + Canada): 800-452-2400

US Number: +1-619-640-4660

Support: service@medlink.com

Editor: editor@medlink.com

ISSN: 2831-9125

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Associated Disorders

Anterior spinal artery syndrome
Breast cancer
Epidural lipomatosis
Kidney cancer
Lung cancer
- Lymphoma
- Melanoma
- Methotrexate myelopathy
- Paraneoplastic subacute necrotic myelopathy
- Prostate cancer
- Radiation myelopathy
- Sarcoma
- Spinal arteriovenous malformation
- Subdural hematoma

Differential Diagnosis

vertebral metastases without epidural spinal cord compression
malignant plexopathy
leptomeningeal metastases/carcinomatous meningitis
Brown-Sequard syndrome
dural arteriovenous fistulas
- acute transverse myelopathy
- lung carcinoma
- epidural abscess
- metastatic vertebral disease
- arteriovenous malformation
- carcinomatous meningitis
- intradural extramedullary metastases
- intradural intramedullary metastases
- vascular damage to the spinal cord
- muscle strain
- myelopathy secondary to paraneoplastic syndromes
- myelopathy secondary to radiation
- myelopathy secondary to intrathecal methotrexate chemotherapy
- myelopathy secondary to infectious diseases
- myelopathy secondary to coagulopathies
- osteoporotic vertebral body fractures
- traumatic vertebral body fractures

Also Relevant

Back pain
Back pain in children
Intramedullary spinal cord metastatic tumors
Radiation myelopathy

Clinical Categories

Neuro-Oncology

Web References

Clinical Trials

NIH: Spinal Tumors

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Cite this article

Introduction

Overview

Key points

Historical note and terminology

Clinical manifestations

Presentation and course

Prognosis and complications

Table 1. Significant Prognostic Factors and Corresponding Scores in Patients With Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Treated With Radiation Therapy

Clinical vignette

Biological basis

Etiology and pathogenesis

Epidemiology

Prevention

Differential diagnosis

Diagnostic workup

Management

Table 2. Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) System

Media

References

Contributors

Authors

Former Authors

Patient Profile

ICD & OMIM codes

This is an article preview.
Start a Free Account
to access the full version.

Questions or Comment?

Also in This Category

Turcot syndrome

Vestibular schwannoma

Palliative and end-of-life care for neuro-oncology patients

Tovorafenib

Vorasidenib

Selumetinib

Mirdametinib

Neurolymphomatosis

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Cite this article

Introduction

Overview

Key points

Historical note and terminology

Clinical manifestations

Presentation and course

Prognosis and complications

Table 1. Significant Prognostic Factors and Corresponding Scores in Patients With Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression Treated With Radiation Therapy

Clinical vignette

Biological basis

Etiology and pathogenesis

Epidemiology

Prevention

Differential diagnosis

Diagnostic workup

Management

Table 2. Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) System

Media

References

Contributors

Authors

Former Authors

Patient Profile

ICD & OMIM codes

This is an article preview. Start a Free Account to access the full version.

Questions or Comment?

Also in This Category

Turcot syndrome

Vestibular schwannoma

Palliative and end-of-life care for neuro-oncology patients

Tovorafenib

Vorasidenib

Selumetinib

Mirdametinib

Neurolymphomatosis

This is an article preview.
Start a Free Account
to access the full version.