古矢 丈雄

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective registry study. OBJECTIVE: To clarify minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for surgical interventions for spinal metastases, thereby enhancing patient care by integrating quality of life (QoL) assessments with clinical outcomes. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite its proven usefulness in degenerative spinal diseases and deformities, the MCID remains unexplored regarding surgery for spinal metastases. METHODS: This study included 171 (out of 413) patients from the multicenter "Prospective Registration Study on Surgery for Metastatic Spinal Tumors" by the Japan Association of Spine Surgeons. These were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively using the Face scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L), including the visual analog scale (VAS), and performance status. The MCIDs were calculated using an anchor-based method, classifying participants into the improved, unchanged, and deteriorated groups based on the Face scale scores. Focusing on the improved and unchanged groups, the change in the EQ-5D-5L values from before to after treatment was analyzed, and the cutoff value with the highest sensitivity and specificity was determined as the MCID through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The validity of the MCIDs was evaluated using a distribution-based calculation method for patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: The improved, unchanged, and deteriorated groups comprised 121, 28, and 22 participants, respectively. The anchor-based MCIDs for the EQ-5D-5L index, EQ-VAS, and domains of mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression were 0.21, 15.50, 1.50, 0.50, 0.50, 0.50, and 0.50, respectively; the corresponding distribution-based MCIDs were 0.17, 15,99, 0.77, 0.80, 0.78, 0.60, and 0.70, respectively. CONCLUSION: We identified MCIDs for surgical treatment of spinal metastases, providing benchmarks for future clinical research. By retrospectively examining whether the MCIDs are achieved, factors favoring their achievement and risks affecting them can be explored. This could aid in decisions on surgical candidacy and patient counseling.

This retrospective cohort study established malnutrition's impact on mortality and neurological recovery of older patients with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). It included patients aged ≥ 65 years with traumatic cervical SCI treated conservatively or surgically. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index was calculated to assess nutritional-related risk. Overall, 789 patients (mean follow-up: 20.1 months) were examined and 47 had major nutritional-related risks on admission. One-year mortality rate, median survival time, neurological recovery, and activities of daily living (ADL) at 1 year post-injury were compared between patients with major nutrition-related risk and matched controls selected using 1:2 propensity score matching to adjust for age, pre-traumatic neurological impairment, and activity. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, the median survival times were 44.9 and 76.5 months for patients with major nutrition-related risk and matched controls, respectively (p = 0.015). Matched controls had more individuals with a neurological improvement of American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale ≥ 1 grade (p = 0.039) and independence in ADL at 1 year post-injury than patients with major nutrition-related risk (p < 0.05). In conclusion, 6% of older patients with cervical SCI had major nutrition-related risks; they showed a significantly higher 1 year mortality rate, shorter survival time, poorer neurological improvement, and lower ADL at 1 year post-injury than matched controls.