↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the relevance of surgery in a retrospective case series of patients who underwent the surgical treatment of a symptomatic spine metastasis from lung cancer

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the relevance of surgery in a retrospective case series of patients who underwent the surgical treatment of a symptomatic spine metastasis from lung cancer
Published in
European Spine Journal, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00586-016-4397-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fahed Zairi, Mélodie-Anne Karnoub, Marie-Hélène Vieillard, Alkis Bouras, Paulo Marinho, Mohamed Allaoui, Patrick Devos, Richard Assaker

Abstract

The management of spine metastases is an increasing concern for spine surgeons. When considering surgery, it is crucial to ensure that its iatrogenic effects will not exceed its potential benefits, particularly in frail patients with short life expectancy. Among all prognostic factors, the primary site of cancer is the most important, lung cancer being the poorest. Although surgery has shown its effectiveness in the management of spine metastases, there is a lack of studies focusing on lung cancer alone. To assess the effectiveness and safety of surgery in the management of symptomatic spine metastases from lung cancer. We retrospectively reviewed all patients (n = 53) who underwent surgery for spine metastasis from lung cancer at the Lille University Hospital between January 2005 and December 2011. Patients for whom surgery was effective to restore or preserve ambulation, to relieve pain, and to ensure stability without severe complication were considered "surgical success". No patient was lost to follow-up and vital status data were available for all patients. The median survival was 2.1 months and was not influenced by the surgical success (p = 0.1766). We reported seven major complications in seven patients, including three epidural haematoma, two massive pulmonary embolisms and two deaths from cardiopulmonary failure. The surgical success rate was 49 % and on univariate analysis, the factors that have influenced the postoperative outcome were the KPS (p < 0.001), the Frankel grade (p = 0.0217) and the delay between the cancer diagnosis and the occurrence of spine metastases (p = 0.0216). A strict patient selection is required to limit the iatrogenic effect of surgery, which may alter the quality of life of these frail patients with limited life expectancy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 8 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 12 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Philosophy 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2016.
All research outputs
#20,303,950
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from European Spine Journal
#3,645
of 4,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333,477
of 396,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Spine Journal
#62
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,640 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.