COMPRESSION OF THE spinal cord is a medical emergency. If treatment is unsuccessful, transection of the cord results in lack of sensation, paralysis of limbs, and loss of sphincter control. When the compression is the result of lymphoma or metastatic carcinoma, management has classically consisted of laminectomy and tumor resection. Most centers utilize radiation therapy postoperatively in low to regular daily dose schedules as an adjuvant to the surgical attack, occasionally with the simultaneous administration of chemotherapy. The rationale evolved has been based upon the emergency nature of spinal cord compression and the dire consequences of failure to halt its progression. Because immediate decompression is considered essential, laminectomy is the procedure of choice. Some physicians believe that surgical decompression also reduces the risk of radiation edema due to tumor or spinal cord swelling, which may heighten the risk of further cord compression before relief is obtained. The statistics in the literature are such that any combination of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy can be justified. Each combined attack has had some measure of success, but there is no agreement as to a preferred therapeutic approach. Our results offer new clinical evidence which challenges the status quo of initial surgical management in favor of high daily dose radiotherapy without the need for laminectomy or systemic chemotherapy. Review of The Literature : Historical Perspective (Table I) Concepts in medicine are slow to change. The first description of compression of the spinal cord resulting from tumor was by Mongagni in 1769, while the first successful removal of a spinal cord tumor by surgery was achieved by Horsley in 1887. In subsequent decades, surgical approaches to spinal cord tumors were developed and refined. A pioneer and leader was Elsberg, who published his treatise on this subject in 1929. His philosophy, which has essentially guided the therapeutic effort in managing spinal cord compression by tumor, is reflected in the following statement: “Whenever the diagnosis of compression of the spinal cord by an extramedullary new growth has been made, operative interference should follow without more than the necessary delay.” This point of view was presented with some modification in his book of 1941, in which he advocated palliative measures for relief of pain (principally chordotomy in cases of malignancy). The lack of a consistent terminology for the description of the degree of impairment, coupled with the failure to quantify the therapeutic response of neurological recovery objectively in most reports, makes it difficult to compare different series. The numerous clinical variables in presentation and management are often lacking, and any attempt to tabulate such data is consequently handicapped when offered as a basis for historical review and criticism.
Read full abstract