[Single factor analysis of motor dysfunction and imaging and clinical features in metastatic epidural spinal cord compression]

Abstract

Objective: To explore the relationship of motor dysfunction of the lower extremities with the imaging appearances and clinical features of metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCCs).

Methods: From July 2006 to December 2007, 26 successive patients with metastases of the thoracic, lumbar and the cervical spine were treated in our department. Forty-three main involved vertebra in all 26 patients were evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography, and were scored according motor dysfunction in this study. Fourteen patients (25 vertebrae) had motor dysfunction.

Results: Among 26 patients, 12 cases with visceral metastasis,in which had motor dysfunction in 10 cases; 14 cases without visceral metastasis, in which had motor dysfunction in 4 cases; comparison between two groups, P=0.0079. Among vertebral presence of continuity of 43 main involved vertebrae, 16 vertebrae had motor dysfunction;among vertebral absence of continuity, motor dysfunction occurred in 9 vertebrae, comparison between two groups, P=0.1034. Among vertebral presence of lamina involvement of 43 main involved vertebrae, 11 vertebrae had motor dysfunction; among vertebral absence of lamina involvement, motor dysfunction occurred in 14 vertebrae, comparison between two groups, P=0.020 5. Among vertebral presence of protruding of vertebral posterior wall of 43 main involved vertebrae, 12 vertebrae had motor dysfunction; among vertebral absence of protruding of vertebral posterior wall, 13 vertebrae had motor dysfunction, comparison between two groups, P=0.0334. Among vertebral presence of involvement epidural space of 43 main involved vertebrae, 11 vertebrae had motor dysfunction; among vertebral absence of involvement epidural space, 14 vertebrae had motor dysfunction, comparison between two groups, P=0.003 6. Such factors as age, gender, whether or not received regular chem before admission, back pain degree of metastasis, received regular chem before admission, therapeutic efficacy of primary tumor, number of bony metastases outside spine, number of the main involved vertebrae, level of vertebral metastases location, level of continuous involved vertebrae, vertebral-body involvement, fracture of anterior column, fracture of posterior wall, and pedicle involvement had no effects on incidence of motor dysfunction due to MESCC (P>0.05).

Conclusion: MESCC with visceral metastases, lamina involvement, presence of outstanding buttocks sign of posterior wall,involvement epidural space tended to cause symptomatic MESCC. Incidence of continuity of main involved vertebrae occurred more frequently in the CUTS compared with other levels of spine.