En Bloc Spondylectomy versus Separation Surgery for Spinal Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Two main surgical techniques to treat spinal metastases are available: 1) en bloc spondylectomy, involving complete resection of the affected vertebrae, and 2) separation surgery with partial debulking followed by stereotactic body therapy (SBRT). Comparative outcomes between these approaches have not been well studied. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception until January 2024 for studies comparing en bloc spondylectomy to separation surgery with SBRT for metastatic spinal tumors. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis models. Overall survival and progression-free survival were analyzed using aggregated Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. Thirty-two observational studies (1149 patients) were included. Six hundred forty-two patients underwent en bloc resection, and 507 patients had separation surgery with SBRT. En bloc procedures had increased intraoperative blood loss (mean difference 883 mL, P < 0.001) and postoperative infection risk (odds ratio: 1.44, 95% confidence interval: 0.54-2.33, P = 0.05) compared to separation surgery with SBRT. No differences were found for length of stay, progression-free survival, overall survival, or recurrence rates (all P > 0.05). Outcomes are comparable between en bloc spondylectomy and separation surgery with SBRT for spinal metastases, but en bloc techniques lead to a higher complication rate. Additional rigorous comparative effectiveness research is needed to refine patient selection criteria for these invasive procedures.