Impact of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and pathological vertebral compression fracture (pVCF) in neurological and survival prognosis

Abstract

BackgroundMetastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) and pathological vertebral compression fractures (pVCF) are the most serious debilitating morbidities of spine metastases (SpMs) causing devastating neurological damages. The respective impact of these two metastasis-spreading entities on survival and on neurological damage is debated. MethodsA French prospective cohort study collected 279 consecutive patients presenting with SpMs between January 2017 and 2021. We compared 174 patients with MESCC and 105 patients with pVCF. ResultsThe median Overall Survival (OS) for the MESCC group was 13.4 months (SD 1.5) vs 19.2 months (SD 2.3) for pVCF patients (p = 0.085). Sixty-five patients (23.3 %) were operated on: 49/65 (75.4 %) in the MESCC group and 16/65 (15.2 %) in the pVCF group, p < 0.0001. At 6 months FU, in the MESCC group, 21/44 (45.4 %) of non-ambulatory patients at onset improved to ambulatory status (Frankel D-E) vs 10/13 (76.9 %) in the pVCF group (p = 0.007). In multivariable analysis with the Cox proportional hazard model, good ECOG-PS and SINS Score 7–12 [HR: 6.755, 95 % CI 2.40–19.00; p = 0.001] were good prognostic factors for preserved ambulatory neurological status. However, SpMs diagnosed synchronously with the primary tumor [HR: 0.397, 95 % CI 0.185–0.853; p = 0.018] and MESCC [HR: 0.058, 95 % CI 0.107–0.456; p = 0.007] were independent risk factors for impaired neurological function. ConclusionContrary to pVCF, MESCC causes neurological damage. Nevertheless, neurological recovery remains possible. MESCC and pVCF have no impact on survival. The management of MESCC remains to be clarified and optimized to reduce neurological damage.