Complication avoidance, rehabilitation, pain therapy and palliative care for patients with metastatic spine tumors: WFNS spine committee recommendations.

Introduction

Spinal metastases, predominantly from lung, prostate and breast cancer, have an incidence of 15.67%. Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC) occurs in almost 10% of these patients, with pathological fracture in 1 out of 8 patients [ 1 ]. In up to 1/5 of all cases, neurological deficits and pain with spinal cord compression which warrant surgical therapy occur [ 2 ]. Surgical complication rate is estimated between 10% and 66.7% [ 3 , 4 ]. Since there is an increase in total number of surgeries for spinal metastases followed by improvement of technique, increase of complications is expected [ 3 ]. Recovery due to deficits caused by MESCC is facilitated also through rehabilitation, similarly as in cases of traumatic spinal injury [ 5 , 6 ]. Palliative therapy and pain management are important in preservation of patient Quality of Life (QoL) even in the latter stage cancer course [ 7 ]. Pain of moderate to severe intensity occurs in more than 50% of all cancer patients [ 8 ].

The goal of this work is to produce the latest evidence-based recommendations on avoidance of complications in treatment of patients with spinal metastases, on role of rehabilitation, pain therapy and palliative care, with a particular relevance for practicing spinal surgeons in low-and middle income countries. The goals of this specific paper are to summarize the latest evidence on the preoperative and intraoperative risk factors for complications, strategies on avoidance of complications and postoperative monitoring, current concepts of mobilization and rehabilitation of these patients and to analyze guidelines and current literature on pain therapy and palliative care. The World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) Spine Committee formulated nine final consensus statements on LHD via two-rounds of Delphi meetings.

Materials and methods

The systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane guidelines [ 9 ] .

Search strategy

A systematic literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL was performed from 2013 to 2023 using the search terms “complications” + “spine metastases”, “spine metastases” + “rehabilitation”, “spine metastases” + “pain therapy” + “palliative care”. Only articles that specifically dealt with aspects of complications, rehabilitation, pain therapy and palliative care in the context of spinal metastases were taken into consideration. We focused explicitly on official guidelines of neurosurgical and spine societies, randomized controlled trials, and retrospective and prospective studies with more than 50 patients. Case reports with less than 50 patients, nonhuman studies, studies without full text available, and studies not in English were excluded.

In addition list of eligible trials and reviews was manually checked by coauthors. A complete search strategy is available. The coauthors screened titles and abstracts of all records after duplicates were removed, followed by screening of full texts. All authors have used a standardized data extraction form to collate study characteristics (publication year, country, number of patients), and main subject of the study (complications, rehabilitation, pain therapy and palliative care).

For complications and complication avoidance of spine metastases, 3687 articles across all databases were obtained. After removing duplicates, abstract review by two independent reviewers, and full text review of the remaining studies, the authors selected 35 studies for analysis (Fig. 1 ). For rehabilitation of patients with spine metastases, articles were obtained. After removing duplicates, abstract, and full text review, 15 studies were included in the final analysis (Fig. 2 ). For pain therapy and palliative care, 2750 articles were initially obtained. Full text review of manuscripts was performed, resulting in total 56 studies included in the final analysis (Fig. 3 ).

Fig. 1 PRISMA flow chart for identification of studies for complications and complications avoidance in spine metastases

Fig. 2 PRISMA flow chart for rehabilitation in spine metastases

Fig. 3 PRISMA flow chart for pain therapy and palliative care in patients with spine metastases

Consensus meetings

An international committee of spinal surgeons, specifically members of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) Spine Committee, organized two consensus meetings on spinal metastases, the first of which was conducted in Karad, India, in January 2023, and the second in Belgrade, Serbia, in October 2023. Set of statements on spinal metastases was provided by each participant and discussed at the initial meeting. After a preliminary voting session, some statements were excluded because of the low evidence of existing literature. Nine revised statements were voted on at the second meeting.

We utilized the Delphi method to generate our consensus statements. The level of agreement or disagreement on each item was voted independently in a blind fashion through a Likert-type scale from 1 to 5 (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 3 = somewhat agree, 4 = disagree, 5 = strongly disagree). Results were presented as a percentage of respondents who scored each item as 1, 2, or 3 (agreement) or as 4 or 5 (disagreement). When agreement or disagreement sum was achieved > 66%, consensus was declared. See Table 1 that shows final voting on the final nine statements.

Table 1 Final voting results on nine statements Statement No of respondents of agreement according to Likert scale/Percent 1- Preoperative assessment for complications following surgery in patients with metastatic spine tumors should include estimation of Karnofsky score, primary tumor, number of spinal and visceral metastasis, ASA score and preoperative Hb (Hemoglobin) value 9/9 agreement 100% 2- There is evidence that advanced age (> 65 years) is a significant risk factor for complications in treatment of patients with spinal metastases. (9/9 agreement 100%) 9 /9 agreement 100% 3- Preoperative ASA score of 3 and 4 increases risk of medical and surgical complications in patients with spinal metastasis. Surgical treatment planning in these patients needs additional consideration in respect of duration and invasiveness of surgery and estimated blood loss. 5/8 agreement 87.5% 4- Patients who underwent surgery for spine metastasis with greater blood loss have increased likelihood for cardiovascular events, pulmonary insufficiency and cerebral events, therefore these patients need careful monitoring of these potential postoperative complications. 9/9 agreement 100% 5- Early postoperative mobilization and multimodal pain management are encouraged for high-risk patients with spinal metastasis 9/9 agreement 100% 6- Pain management and palliation in spinal metastasis should be performed as indicated by the WHO analgesic ladder appropriate for the severity of pain starting with non-opioids, weak opioids followed by strong opioids 8/8 agreement 100% 7- The opioid of first choice for moderate to severe cancer pain is oral morphine [1, A], with a different opioid to be considered in the absence of adequate pain control (despite opioid dose escalation) or in the presence of unacceptable opioid side effects 8/8 agreement 100% 8- IV-PCA may provide timely, safe, and useful analgesia for patient with severe breakthrough pain, however clinicians need to closely monitor delirium and toxicity in advanced cancer patients 8/8 agreement 100% 9- Bisphosphonates may be considered for the treatment of patients with bone metastases with a good prognosis, especially when pain is not localized or RT is not readily accessible 8/8 agreement 100%

Results and discussion

Complications and avoidance of complications in spine metastases

Surgical complications can be divided in strictly surgical complications, complications regarding anesthesia and patient positioning as well as [ 3 ]. 6.5% postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) rate with 8.3% re-operation rate was reported as the main complication following surgery for spinal metastases, followed by postoperative neurological deterioration 3.3% and hardware failure 2% in a recent literature review [ 10 ]. Choi et al. [ 11 , 12 ] performed a prospective study on 1430 patients with spinal metastases to analyze surgery outcomes. Presence of spinal and visceral metastases, tumor type as well as Karnofsky score were identified as important for prognosis in respect to surgical treatment [ 11 ]. Karnofsky score estimates preoperative general condition and in combination with tumor histology and staging expressed through number of spinal and other distant metastases deems proper selection of candidates for surgery. Further important factors are ASA score and preoperative Hemoglobin (Hb) value [ 11 , 13 ]. Complication risk assessment includes also choice of surgical technique– decompression, decompression + fusion as well as open vs. percutaneous stabilization, due to differences in wound surface and blood loss. There are several strategies to prevent postoperative infection: local antibiotics, wound surface minimization through employment of minimally invasive techniques, timing of adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy following surgery. Several factors which were identified to increase morbidity following surgery are age of 40 and older, with further significant increase in older than 65 years, surgery on three levels and more, surgery on patients who had previously radiotherapy as well as myelopathy presence and surgeons experience [ 14 ]. Estimation of complications risk can be performed indirectly using traditional scoring systems such as Tokuhashi [ 15 ] or Spinal Metastasis Invasiveness Index (SMII) [ 16 ], which predicts high blood loss and prolonged duration of surgery. One further prognostic score, New England Spinal Metastasis Score (NESMS), which was created using NSQIP (National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) database with 776 patients [ 17 , 18 ] reported a 30-day mortality rate of 11% ( N = 87), and morbidity including one or more complications in 51% of patients ( N = 395). NESMS score of 3 has shown 74% reduction in major systemic complications and an 88% reduction in failure to rescue [ 18 ].

Surgeons should not be biased against operating elderly patients, as prospective multicenter study by the Global Spine Tumor Study concluded [ 19 ]. Patients older than 80 years show less neurological improvement and worse survival rate compared to younger ones, which might be due to the fact that these patients, although sometimes with good ASA status and fair functional status, more often undergo emergency and palliative procedures. Operating the elderly is compounded by the fact that they undergo more emergency and palliative procedures, despite good ASA scores and functional status [ 19 ]. Yonezawa et al. report on 129 perioperative complications in 76 of 112 surgeries in their cohort, with increased complication rate in elderly patients; however, prognosis and local control shows improvement following resection, especially in cases of primary tumors such as renal cell and thyroid cancer [ 20 ]. Multicenter surveillance study from German Spinal Registry (DWG-Register) [ 21 ] which included 1617 decompression surgeries with and without instrumentation identified that the overall prevalence of a major postoperative complication for patients with spinal metastases was 16.5%, and prevalence of intraoperative complications 8%. The likelihood ratio for major complications by blood loss greater than 500 mL were as follows: cardiovascular event 4.22, pulmonary insufficiency 4.18, and cerebral event 5.47 [ 21 ]. Higher risk of complications is independently predicted by preoperative status with ASA score of 3 and 4, invasiveness or surgery, blood loss > 500 mL and necessity and quantity of blood transfusions. Further study from the same registry on 528 patients identified obesity as a risk factor, since these patients were predisposed to have blood loss more than 500 mL more often than nonobese patients, and were more likely to have ASA score of 3 and 4 [ 22 ].

There were several studies on wound healing deficits in patients with spinal metastases. Study of Keam et al. [ 23 ] on 165 patients who underwent surgical treatment and had prior radiation therapy, did not find a correlation between radiation and extensive wound healing problems. An analysis of 205 patients from Varga et al. [ 24 ] revealed that there were no differences in incidence of wound healing deficits and reoperations regardless of preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy or no radiotherapy at all. An optimal radiation therapy-surgery interval has not been defined yet, however based on published literature and expert opinions, an interval of 2 weeks, the minimum being 7 days, is recommended, with possibility of reduction in postop-stereotactic body RT [ 25 ]. Further conclusions were that if RT-surgery window is > 12 months, wound-complications rise, and that postop-RT has fewer wound complications versus preop-RT [ 25 ]. There are no studies which are specific for spine metastases and prevention of wound healing deficits using topical antibiotics. The data from the literature are somewhat contradictory – a randomized controlled trial has shown that intra-wound vancomycin has no effect on SSI; in addition it has shown to increase the rate of gram-negative infections [ 26 ], whereas systematic review by Zhou et al. [ 27 ]. demonstrated lower incidence of SSI with local application of vancomycin powder ( 1.9% vs. 4.8%). Zhou et al. have also investigated differences in invasiveness of surgery in relation to incidence of wound healing deficits and found that highest incidence as in surgery with instrumentation, in open surgery and in patients with neuromuscular diseases [ 27 ]. Similarly, highest wound revision rate was found following instrumentation in analysis of Han-Dong Lee et al., with lowest rate for vertebroplasty and decompression only [ 28 ].

Adjuvant minimaly invasive interventions have emerged in cases of frail patients who are not suitable candidates for surgery as well as in patients with mild instability of the spine, such as ablation techniques which use intraoperative MRI guidance to place a probe within the target lesion and to monitor temperature-dependent killing of the tumor cells [ 29 ]. Promising strategies which have emerged as less invasive alternatives in treatment of spinal metastases are a combination of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and vertebral augmentation, such as balloon kyphoplasty and other techniques [ 30 ]. Recent systematic review which included 947 patients from 25 studies who underwent this combined treatment revealed that significant pain reduction was noted, with a low complication rate of 1% [ 30 ]. Most common complications were radiculopathy, which was usually not permanent, as well as extravasation of cement, which was asymptomatic [ 30 ]. Implementation of these therapy modalities has also shown favorable effects on local tumor progression control, especially in cases of lesions located within the vertebral body compared to those with involvement of posterior elements, with a rate of only 5% in short-term and long-term follow-up, and rate of 22% in mid-term follow up [ 30 ] and with consistently low tumor progression rates throughout the literature. This review noted a very high local tumor control of 91% [ 30 ]. Other systematic analyses suggested that microwave ablation (MWA) in combination with surgery might be more beneficial in terms of local tumor control compared to RFA, however with a significantly higher complication rate of MWA compared to RFA (27.4 vs. 10.9%) [ 31 ].

The role of types of surgery on complication rate was also investigated. An analysis of National Readmission Database on 4423 patients has shown that spinal fusion and combined fusion and decompression were less likely to have a 30-day readmission compared to spinal decompression alone (difference in comparison to lumbar degenerative spine surgery) [ 32 ]. Postoperative infection, acute post-hemorrhagic anemia and genitourinary complication with sepsis were the most common reason for readmission [ 32 ]. Contrary to this finding, Lenschow et al. [ 33 ] in their analysis of 301 patients reported that complications occurred more often in instrumented than non-instrumented patients, without differences in neurological outcome. Invasiveness of surgery has also shown correlation to incidence of complications, as shown by Pranata et al. in systematic review of 8 studies and 486 patients, where MISS was associated with lower complications, lower blood loss and transfusion rate, and shorter length of stay without effect on neurological outcome and operative time [ 34 ]. When comparing laminectomy to corpectomy [ 35 ], a greater 30-day postoperative complication rate among patients undergoing corpectomy was noted.

Recently, concept of readmission-free survival was defined as the time duration between discharge after index-operation and first unplanned hospital readmission (UHR)/ death [ 36 ]. Short-term readmission free survival, i.e. under 90 days, was found to be influenced by preoperative hemoglobin (Hb) level > 12 g/dL, ≤ 3 comorbidities, shorter index length of stay ≤ 10 days and absence of neurologic/hematologic complications during index stay, whereas Hb > 12 g/dL as well as primary tumors with advanced treatment modalities were shown to influence readmission after 90 days [ 36 ]. 30 days mortality has shown correlation to steroid use, transfusions, infections, smoking and presence of bleeding disorders [ 37 ].

Rehabilitation of patients with spinal metastases

Main goals of rehabilitation following surgery for MESCC are optimization of the remaining neurological function to increase patient autonomy and preserve quality of life, as well as providing for assistive devices to improve patient autonomy and safety [ 6 ]. An analysis of 309 patients with spine metastases, of which 177 were included into in “Enhanced Recovery After Surgery” (ERAS) program and comparison to non-EAS group has shown that ERAS cohort had decreased estimated blood loss, mean opioid use in the first five days following surgery, earlier removal of urinary catheter and earlier ambulation [ 38 , 39 ]. ERAS program has led to reduced hospital stay as well as reduced opioid use [ 38 ]. In UK, a six weeks inpatient Specialist Spinal Rehabilitation program was initiated for patients with MESCC [ 40 ], with improvement in the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, independent of age. Prior to rehabilitation it is necessary to rule out fractures, since rehabilitation for patients with bone metastases increases the risk of adverse events, including pathological fractures and paralysis. Therefore, risk assessment for fractures prior to rehabilitation, for example using SINS index, is necessary [ 41 ].

Pain therapy and palliative care for patients with spinal metastases

Physical, emotional and spiritual distress in relation to neurological complications and distress should be treated with palliative care [ 6 ]. Patient expectation as well as prognosis should be taken into account in terms of palliative care, as recommended by The European Association of Palliative Care [ 42 ]. The WHO (2018) defines palliative care as an “approach that improves the quality of life of patients and their families facing the problems associated with life-threatening illness, through the prevention and relief of suffering by means of early identification and impeccable assessment and treatment of pain and other problems, physical, psychosocial and spiritual” [ 43 ].

Oncological pain therapy is defined by analgesic ladder proposed by WHO [ 44 ], yet without standardization of cancer pain classification [ 8 ]. Need for opioid therapy due to chronic pain is present in up to 50% of patients at the beginning of the cancer disease, and progresses in 75–90% in advanced stage [ 45 ]. There is a trend of replacement of invasive procedures (en-bloc spondylectomies) by less invasive separation surgery, then the use of MISS due to lower complication rate, and stereotactic radiosurgery [ 46 ]. Furthermore, in the era of targeted therapies which change treatment of oncological patients, modern treatment principles are based on decision made by multidisciplinary team with oncologists, radiation therapists, surgeons, interventionalists, and pain specialists is required [ 46 ].Pain management includes variety of different modalities such as analgesics, blocks, PCA, radio ablation, combination of RFA and other treatments, augmentation procedures and spinal cord stimulation. ESMO clinical guidelines defined in 2012 that “pain management and palliation in spinal metastases should be performed step by step as indicated by the WHO analgesic ladder appropriate for the severity of pain starting with Non opioids, Weak opioids followed by Strong opioids. Adjuvant can be added to pain therapy in all steps to increase their effectiveness with PCA as an important option. [II, B]“ [ 47 ]. Pain intensity and outcome of treatment according to ESMO guidelines as well as EAPC evidence-based warrants assessment using VAS scale as well as with assessment of psychosocial distress [ 48 – 51 ].

Palliative radiotherapy enables in 60% of patients sufficient pain relief with age, numerical rating scale (NRS), and biological effective dose (BED10) as important factors which influence pain response in spinal metastases [ 52 ]. Nakata et al. [ 53 ] investigated pain response to radiotherapy in 109 patients with spine metastases without paralysis and reported that pain disappeared in 88% of the patients with spinal stability (SINS < 7) and in 58% of the patients with spinal instability (SINS ≥ 7). In all patients with bone metastases who experience pain, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was proposed with a single dose of 8 Gy and possibility of re-radiation in cases of recurrent pain [ 54 ]. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with or without cement injection in cases of osteolytic bone metastases has shown pain relief in prospective series with 34 patients [ 55 ]. When it comes to osteolytic lesions, mechanical stability can be provided with cement and RFA [ 56 ]. Giammalva et al. [ 57 ] demonstrated a significant pain reduction in 54 patients with thoraco-lumbar metastatic vertebral fractures with combination treatment of vertebroplasty, RFA and transpedicular screw fixation. Vertebral augmentation with RFA [ 58 ] is also called augmentation surgery, and it has shown that it leads to relief in patients with severe intractable pain and stable metastatic compression vertebral fractures. Further techniques include microwave ablation with osteoplasty [ 59 ] which has shown pain reduction in patients with persistent or recurrent pain after radiation therapy, patients who were not candidates or declined radiotherapy [ 60 ]. Percutaneous image-guided cryoablation is further method for pain relief and achieving local control [ 61 ].

According to ECMO guidelines, for mild to moderate pain, weak opioids such as tramadol, dihydrocodeine and codeine can be given in combination with non-opioid analgesics. As an alternative to weak opioids, although not a part of WHO scheme, low doses of strong opioids could be an option [ 49 ]. Paracetamol and/or a NSAID are effective in short term for treating all intensities of pain [ 62 ]. ESMO [ 49 , 50 ] guidelines further define oral morphine as the first choice opioid for moderate to severe pain. First-choice alternative route for patients unable to receive opioids by oral is s.c. route (morphine, diamorphine and hydromorphone) [ 49 , 50 ]. I.v. infusion should be considered when s.c. administration is contraindicated, such as in cases of peripheral oedema, coagulation disorders, poor peripheral circulation and need for high volumes and doses [ 49 , 50 ].

Targeted therapies for bone metastatic pain include bisphosphonates and denosumab [ 63 ]. Bisphosphonates and denosumab are thought to delay the onset of pain [ 64 ], whereas bisphosphonates are not used for localized pain [ 65 – 67 ]. Alternative to bisphosphonates is denosumab, especially for delaying bone pain recurrence in patients with metastases of solid tumors and multiple myeloma [ 68 – 70 ]. Systematic review within the European Association for Palliative Care guidelines project revealed that there is no sufficient evidence to support use of this medication for pain treatment [ 64 ].

Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is caused by nerve damage attributable to the cancer, and/or oncological treatments such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery, with prevalence up to 40% [ 71 , 72 ]. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are used for treatment together with serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) [ 73 ]. Recommendation for NCP treatment as monotherapy exists for gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine and TCA (doses ≤ 75 mg/day) with, n case of insufficient analgesia, an opioid switching concept, which contains use of adjuvant drugs such as gabapentinoids,, and antidepressants (amitriptyline) as well as methadone, although titration and dose conversion need to be taken into consideration [ 73 ]. Novel agents include Tetrodotoxin, Botulinum Toxin Type A (BoNT-A), TRPM8 Activator Menthol, Growth Factors Inhibitors and Lemairamin [ 73 ].

For severe, breakthrough pain, intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) can provide sufficient pain relief and can help titration of opioids, weaning to oral analgesia and to decide for interventional procedures [ 74 ]. Monitoring is warranted for side effects, such as risk of delirium [ 75 ]. Recent database analysis on over 11,000 patients revealed that intravenous PCA use after surgery ( continuous or total volume of infusions), was significantly associated with the occurrence and severity of postoperative pain both in the first and second 24 h postoperatively, which suggest that the pain control was not sufficient [ 76 ]. Finaly, spinal cord stimulation was described in smaller case series as useful for treatment of refractory cancer pain and chemotherapy-related pain [ 77 ]. Intrathecal morphine pump can also be considered for refractory cancer pain.

WFNS Spine committee recommendations

After summarizing and discussing the available literature, as outlined above, the WFNS achieved consensus on the following nine statements.

Complication avoidance and rehabilitation of geriatric patients with metastatic vertebral tumors:

1

Preoperative assessment for complications following surgery in patients with metastatic spine tumors should include estimation of Karnofsky score, primary tumor, number of spinal and visceral metastasis, ASA score and preoperative Hb (Hemoglobin) value. (9/9 agreement 100%)

2

There is evidence that advanced age (> 65 years) is a significant risk factor for complications in treatment of patients with spinal metastases. (9/9 agreement 100%)

3

Preoperative ASA score of 3 and 4 increases risk of medical and surgical complications in patients with spinal metastasis. Surgical treatment planning in these patients needs additional consideration in respect of duration and invasiveness of surgery and estimated blood loss. (5/8 agreement 87.5%)

4

Patients who underwent surgery for spine metastasis with greater blood loss have increased likelihood for cardiovascular events, pulmonary insufficiency, and cerebral events, therefore these patients need careful monitoring of these potential postoperative complications. (9/9 agreement 100%)

5

Early postoperative mobilization and multimodal pain management are encouraged for high-risk patients with spinal metastasis. (9/9 agreement 100%)

Pain therapy and palliative care for metastatic vertebral tumors:

6

Pain management and palliation in spinal metastasis should be performed as indicated by the WHO analgesic ladder appropriate for the severity of pain starting with non-opioids, weak opioids followed by strong opioids. [II, B] (8/8 agreement 100%).

7

The opioid of first choice for moderate to severe cancer pain is oral morphine [1, A], with a different opioid to be considered in the absence of adequate pain control (despite opioid dose escalation) or in the presence of unacceptable opioid side effects. [III, C] (8/8 agreement 100%).

8

IV-PCA may provide timely, safe, and useful analgesia for patient with severe breakthrough pain, however clinicians need to closely monitor delirium and toxicity in advanced cancer patients. (3 C) (8/8 agreement 100%).

9

Bi sphosphonates may be considered for the treatment of patients with bone metastases with a good prognosis, especially when pain is not localized or RT is not readily accessible [2, C]. (8/8 agreement 100%)

Conclusion

These nine final consensus statements provide current, evidence-based guidelines on the complication avoidance, rehabilitation, pain therapy and palliative care for patients with spinal metastases. Preoperative assessment for complications following surgery is obligatory and must include assessment of general condition of the patient, site of primary tumor, number of spinal and visceral metastasis, ASA score and preoperative Hb value. Advanced age > 65 years as well as preoperative ASA score of 3 and 4 are risk factors for complications and special care needs to be taken in such patients. Surgery with greater blood loss increases likelihood for cardiovascular and cerebral events and pulmonary insufficiency, so these patients need careful postoperative monitoring. Multimodal pain management according to WHO analgesic ladder and early mobilization are encouraged. For moderate to severe cancer pain the first-choice opioid must be oral morphine. Use of IV-PCA for severe pain can be useful, however close monitoring of delirium and toxicity is mandatory. In patients with good prognosis, non-localized pain and no availability of radiation therapy, bisphosphonates may be considered for the treatment.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Abbreviations

American Society of Anesthesiologists

Biological effective dose

Computed tomography

The European Association of Palliative Care

External Beam Radiation Therapy

Enhanced recovery after surgery

European Society for Medical Oncology

Hemoglobin

Intravenous patient controlled analgesia

Metastatic epidural spinal cord compression

Minimally invasive spine surgery

Magnetic resonance imaging

Neuropathic cancer pain

New England Spinal Metastasis Score

Numerical rating scale

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug

National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Radiofrequency ablation

Readmission free survival

Radiation therapy

Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score

Spinal metastases

Spinal Metastasis Invasiveness Index

Serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors

Surgical site infection

Tricyclic antidepressants

Unplanned hospital readmission

Visual analogue scale

Vertebral compression fracture

World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies

World Health Organization

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Acknowledgements

Ethical Approval was not applicable. This study has received no funding.

Author contributions

M.P. wrote the main manuscript text. Conceptualization: M.P., M.Z., S.S; Data curation: M.P., S.N., S.V.; Formal Analysis: M.P., M.Z., S.S.; Investigation: M.P.; Methodology: M.P., M.Z.; Project Administration: M.Z., S.S.; Writing - Original Draft: M.P.; Writing - Review & Editing: M.P., S.N., S.V., M.Z., S.S, Z.G. M.P. and M.Z. prepared Figs. 1, 2 and 3. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Funding

This research has received no funding.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

1. Van den Brande R Cornips EM Peeters M Ost P Billiet C Van de Kelft E Epidemiology of spinal metastases, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and pathologic vertebral compression fractures in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review J Bone Oncol 2022 35 100446 10.1016/j.jbo.2022.100446 35860387 PMC9289863 Van den Brande R, Cornips EM, Peeters M, Ost P, Billiet C, Van de Kelft E (2022) Epidemiology of spinal metastases, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and pathologic vertebral compression fractures in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review. J Bone Oncol 35:100446. 10.1016/j.jbo.2022.100446 35860387 10.1016/j.jbo.2022.100446 PMC9289863

2. Nater A, Martin AR, Sahgal A, Choi D, Fehlings MG (2017) Symptomatic spinal metastasis: a systematic literature review of the preoperative prognostic factors for survival, neurological, functional and quality of life in surgically treated patients and methodological recommendations for prognostic studies. PLoS ONE 12(2). 10.1371/journal.pone.0171507. e0171507 10.1371/journal.pone.0171507 PMC5321441 28225772

3. Igoumenou VG Mavrogenis AF Angelini A Baracco R Benzakour A Benzakour T Bork M Vazifehdan F Nena U Ruggieri P Complications of spine surgery for metastasis Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2020 30 1 37 56 10.1007/s00590-019-02541-0 31473821 Igoumenou VG, Mavrogenis AF, Angelini A, Baracco R, Benzakour A, Benzakour T, Bork M, Vazifehdan F, Nena U, Ruggieri P (2020) Complications of spine surgery for metastasis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 30(1):37–56. 10.1007/s00590-019-02541-0 31473821 10.1007/s00590-019-02541-0

4. Vanek P Bradac O Trebicky F Saur K de Lacy P Benes V Influence of the preoperative neurological status on Survival after the Surgical treatment of symptomatic spinal metastases with spinal cord Compression Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2015 40 23 1824 1830 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001141 26536440 Vanek P, Bradac O, Trebicky F, Saur K, de Lacy P, Benes V (2015) Influence of the preoperative neurological status on Survival after the Surgical treatment of symptomatic spinal metastases with spinal cord Compression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40(23):1824–1830. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001141 26536440 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001141

5. Newman WC Patel A Goldberg JL Bilsky MH The importance of multidisciplinary care for spine metastases: initial tumor management Neurooncol Pract 2020 7 Suppl 1 i25 i32 10.1093/nop/npaa056 33299571 PMC7705527 Newman WC, Patel A, Goldberg JL, Bilsky MH (2020) The importance of multidisciplinary care for spine metastases: initial tumor management. Neurooncol Pract 7(Suppl 1):i25–i32. 10.1093/nop/npaa056 33299571 10.1093/nop/npaa056 PMC7705527

6. Esperança-Martins M, Roque D, Barroso T, Abrunhosa-Branquinho A, Belo D, Simas N, Costa L (2023) Multidisciplinary Approach to spinal metastases and metastatic spinal Cord Compression-A New Integrative Flowchart for Patient Management. Cancers (Basel) 15(6). 10.3390/cancers15061796 10.3390/cancers15061796 PMC10046378 36980681

7. Giammalva GR, Ferini G, Torregrossa F, Brunasso L, Musso S, Benigno UE, Gerardi RM, Bonosi L, Costanzo R, Paolini F et al (2022) The Palliative Care in the metastatic spinal tumors. A systematic review on the Radiotherapy and Surgical Perspective. Life (Basel) 12(4). 10.3390/life12040571 10.3390/life12040571 PMC9032747 35455062

8. Caraceni A, Shkodra M (2019) Cancer Pain Assessment and classification. Cancers (Basel) 11(4). 10.3390/cancers11040510 10.3390/cancers11040510 PMC6521068 30974857

9. Page MJ McKenzie JE Bossuyt PM Boutron I Hoffmann TC Mulrow CD Shamseer L Tetzlaff JM Akl EA Brennan SE The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews BMJ 2021 372 n71 10.1136/bmj.n71 33782057 PMC8005924 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71 33782057 10.1136/bmj.n71 PMC8005924

10. Tarawneh AM Pasku D Quraishi NA Surgical complications and re-operation rates in spinal metastases surgery: a systematic review Eur Spine J 2021 30 10 2791 2799 10.1007/s00586-020-06647-6 33184702 Tarawneh AM, Pasku D, Quraishi NA (2021) Surgical complications and re-operation rates in spinal metastases surgery: a systematic review. Eur Spine J 30(10):2791–2799. 10.1007/s00586-020-06647-6 33184702 10.1007/s00586-020-06647-6

11. Choi D Fox Z Albert T Arts M Balabaud L Bunger C Buchowski JM Coppes MH Depreitere B Fehlings MG Prediction of quality of life and survival after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases: a Multicenter Cohort Study to Determine Suitability for Surgical Treatment Neurosurgery 2015 77 5 698 708 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000907 26204361 Choi D, Fox Z, Albert T, Arts M, Balabaud L, Bunger C, Buchowski JM, Coppes MH, Depreitere B, Fehlings MG et al (2015) Prediction of quality of life and survival after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases: a Multicenter Cohort Study to Determine Suitability for Surgical Treatment. Neurosurgery 77(5):698–708 discussion 708. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000907 26204361 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000907

12. Choi D Pavlou M Omar R Arts M Balabaud L Buchowski JM Bunger C Chung CK Coppes MH Depreitere B A novel risk calculator to predict outcome after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases; use of a large prospective patient database to personalise surgical management Eur J Cancer 2019 107 28 36 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.11.011 30529900 Choi D, Pavlou M, Omar R, Arts M, Balabaud L, Buchowski JM, Bunger C, Chung CK, Coppes MH, Depreitere B et al (2019) A novel risk calculator to predict outcome after surgery for symptomatic spinal metastases; use of a large prospective patient database to personalise surgical management. Eur J Cancer 107:28–36. 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.11.011 30529900 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.11.011

13. Miranda SP Sullivan PZ Albayar A Ramayya AG Blue R Ali ZS Malhotra N Marcotte P Yoon J Saifi C Preoperative predictors of survival in patients with spinal metastatic disease Int J Spine Surg 2023 17 4 557 563 10.14444/8444 36889904 PMC10478689 Miranda SP, Sullivan PZ, Albayar A, Ramayya AG, Blue R, Ali ZS, Malhotra N, Marcotte P, Yoon J, Saifi C et al (2023) Preoperative predictors of survival in patients with spinal metastatic disease. Int J Spine Surg 17(4):557–563. 10.14444/8444 36889904 10.14444/8444 PMC10478689

14. Lau D Leach MR Than KD Ziewacz J La Marca F Park P Independent predictors of complication following surgery for spinal metastasis Eur Spine J 2013 22 6 1402 1407 10.1007/s00586-013-2706-8 23392558 PMC3676566 Lau D, Leach MR, Than KD, Ziewacz J, La Marca F, Park P (2013) Independent predictors of complication following surgery for spinal metastasis. Eur Spine J 22(6):1402–1407. 10.1007/s00586-013-2706-8 23392558 10.1007/s00586-013-2706-8 PMC3676566

15. Tokuhashi Y Uei H Oshima M Ajiro Y Scoring system for prediction of metastatic spine tumor prognosis World J Orthop 2014 5 3 262 271 10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.262 25035829 PMC4095019 Tokuhashi Y, Uei H, Oshima M, Ajiro Y (2014) Scoring system for prediction of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. World J Orthop 5(3):262–271. 10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.262 25035829 10.5312/wjo.v5.i3.262 PMC4095019

16. Kumar N Ramos MRD Patel R Tan BWL Lopez KG Nolan CP Kumar A Kumar DS Liu G Benneker LM The spinal metastasis invasiveness index: a Novel Scoring System to Assess Surgical Invasiveness Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021 46 7 478 485 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003823 33273437 Kumar N, Ramos MRD, Patel R, Tan BWL, Lopez KG, Nolan CP, Kumar A, Kumar DS, Liu G, Benneker LM (2021) The spinal metastasis invasiveness index: a Novel Scoring System to Assess Surgical Invasiveness. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 46(7):478–485. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003823 33273437 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003823

17. Schoenfeld AJ Ferrone ML Blucher JA Agaronnik N Nguyen L Tobert DG Balboni TA Schwab JH Shin JH Sciubba DM Prospective comparison of the accuracy of the New England spinal metastasis score (NESMS) to legacy scoring systems in prognosticating outcomes following treatment of spinal metastases Spine J 2022 22 1 39 48 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.007 33741509 PMC8443703 Schoenfeld AJ, Ferrone ML, Blucher JA, Agaronnik N, Nguyen L, Tobert DG, Balboni TA, Schwab JH, Shin JH, Sciubba DM et al (2022) Prospective comparison of the accuracy of the New England spinal metastasis score (NESMS) to legacy scoring systems in prognosticating outcomes following treatment of spinal metastases. Spine J 22(1):39–48. 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.007 33741509 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.007 PMC8443703

18. Schoenfeld AJ Le HV Marjoua Y Leonard DA Belmont PJ Bono CM Harris MB Assessing the utility of a clinical prediction score regarding 30-day morbidity and mortality following metastatic spinal surgery: the New England spinal metastasis score (NESMS) Spine J 2016 16 4 482 490 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.043 26409416 Schoenfeld AJ, Le HV, Marjoua Y, Leonard DA, Belmont PJ, Bono CM, Harris MB (2016) Assessing the utility of a clinical prediction score regarding 30-day morbidity and mortality following metastatic spinal surgery: the New England spinal metastasis score (NESMS). Spine J 16(4):482–490. 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.043 26409416 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.09.043

19. Amelot A Balabaud L Choi D Fox Z Crockard HA Albert T Arts CM Buchowski JM Bunger C Chung CK Surgery for metastatic spine tumors in the elderly. Advanced age is not a contraindication to surgery! Spine J 2017 17 6 759 767 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.440 26239762 Amelot A, Balabaud L, Choi D, Fox Z, Crockard HA, Albert T, Arts CM, Buchowski JM, Bunger C, Chung CK et al (2017) Surgery for metastatic spine tumors in the elderly. Advanced age is not a contraindication to surgery! Spine J 17(6):759–767. 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.440 26239762 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.440

20. Yonezawa N Murakami H Demura S Kato S Yoshioka K Shinmura K Yokogawa N Shimizu T Oku N Kitagawa R Perioperative complications and Prognosis of Curative Surgical Resection for spinal metastases in Elderly patients World Neurosurg 2020 137 e144 e151 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.093 31982597 Yonezawa N, Murakami H, Demura S, Kato S, Yoshioka K, Shinmura K, Yokogawa N, Shimizu T, Oku N, Kitagawa R et al (2020) Perioperative complications and Prognosis of Curative Surgical Resection for spinal metastases in Elderly patients. World Neurosurg 137:e144–e151. 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.093 31982597 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.093

21. Vinas-Rios JM Rauschmann M Sellei R Arabmotlagh M Sobotke R Meyer F group D-R s. intra- and postoperative complications in the treatment of spinal metastases. A multicenter surveillance study from the German spinal Registry (DWG-Register) J Neurosurg Sci 2022 66 6 535 541 10.23736/S0390-5616.20.05029-8 33047579 Vinas-Rios JM, Rauschmann M, Sellei R, Arabmotlagh M, Sobotke R, Meyer F, group D-R (2022) s. intra- and postoperative complications in the treatment of spinal metastases. A multicenter surveillance study from the German spinal Registry (DWG-Register). J Neurosurg Sci 66(6):535–541. 10.23736/S0390-5616.20.05029-8 33047579 10.23736/S0390-5616.20.05029-8

22. Vinas-Rios JM Rauschmann M Sellei R Arabmotlagh M Medina-Govea F Meyer F s group D-R Impact of obesity on Perioperative complications on treatment of spinal metastases: a Multicenter Surveillance Study from the German Spine Registry (DWG-Register) Asian J Neurosurg 2022 17 3 442 447 10.1055/s-0042-1756627 36398181 PMC9665982 Vinas-Rios JM, Rauschmann M, Sellei R, Arabmotlagh M, Medina-Govea F, Meyer F, s. group D-R (2022) Impact of obesity on Perioperative complications on treatment of spinal metastases: a Multicenter Surveillance Study from the German Spine Registry (DWG-Register). Asian J Neurosurg 17(3):442–447. 10.1055/s-0042-1756627 36398181 10.1055/s-0042-1756627 PMC9665982

23. Keam J Bilsky MH Laufer I Shi W Zhang Z Tam M Zatcky J Lovelock DM Yamada Y No association between excessive wound complications and preoperative high-dose, hypofractionated, image-guided radiation therapy for spine metastasis J Neurosurg Spine 2014 20 4 411 420 10.3171/2013.12.SPINE12811 24506099 Keam J, Bilsky MH, Laufer I, Shi W, Zhang Z, Tam M, Zatcky J, Lovelock DM, Yamada Y (2014) No association between excessive wound complications and preoperative high-dose, hypofractionated, image-guided radiation therapy for spine metastasis. J Neurosurg Spine 20(4):411–420. 10.3171/2013.12.SPINE12811 24506099 10.3171/2013.12.SPINE12811

24. Vargas E Mummaneni PV Rivera J Huang J Berven SH Braunstein SE Chou D Wound complications in metastatic spine tumor patients with and without preoperative radiation J Neurosurg Spine 2023 38 2 265 270 10.3171/2022.8.SPINE22757 36461846 Vargas E, Mummaneni PV, Rivera J, Huang J, Berven SH, Braunstein SE, Chou D (2023) Wound complications in metastatic spine tumor patients with and without preoperative radiation. J Neurosurg Spine 38(2):265–270. 10.3171/2022.8.SPINE22757 36461846 10.3171/2022.8.SPINE22757

25. Kumar N Madhu S Bohra H Pandita N Wang SSY Lopez KG Tan JH Vellayappan BA Is there an optimal timing between radiotherapy and surgery to reduce wound complications in metastatic spine disease? A systematic review Eur Spine J 2020 29 12 3080 3115 10.1007/s00586-020-06478-5 32556627 Kumar N, Madhu S, Bohra H, Pandita N, Wang SSY, Lopez KG, Tan JH, Vellayappan BA (2020) Is there an optimal timing between radiotherapy and surgery to reduce wound complications in metastatic spine disease? A systematic review. Eur Spine J 29(12):3080–3115. 10.1007/s00586-020-06478-5 32556627 10.1007/s00586-020-06478-5

26. Salimi S Khayat Kashani HR Azhari S Sadeghi S Sheikhghomy S Paryan P KhayatKashani M Local Vancomycin therapy to reduce surgical site infection in adult spine surgery: a randomized prospective study Eur Spine J 2022 31 2 454 460 10.1007/s00586-021-07050-5 34750670 Salimi S, Khayat Kashani HR, Azhari S, Sadeghi S, Sheikhghomy S, Paryan P, KhayatKashani M (2022) Local Vancomycin therapy to reduce surgical site infection in adult spine surgery: a randomized prospective study. Eur Spine J 31(2):454–460. 10.1007/s00586-021-07050-5 34750670 10.1007/s00586-021-07050-5

27. Zhou J Wang R Huo X Xiong W Kang L Xue Y Incidence of Surgical site infection after spine surgery: a systematic review and Meta-analysis Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2020 45 3 208 216 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003218 31464972 Zhou J, Wang R, Huo X, Xiong W, Kang L, Xue Y (2020) Incidence of Surgical site infection after spine surgery: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 45(3):208–216. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003218 31464972 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003218

28. Lee HD, Jang HD, Park JS, Chung NS, Chung HW, Jun JY, Han K, Hong JY (2023) Incidence and risk factors for Wound Revision after Surgical treatment of spinal metastasis: a National Population-based study in South Korea. Healthc (Basel) 11(22). 10.3390/healthcare11222962 10.3390/healthcare11222962 PMC10671392 37998455

29. Porras JL Pennington Z Hung B Hersh A Schilling A Goodwin CR Sciubba DM Radiotherapy and Surgical advances in the treatment of metastatic spine tumors: a narrative review World Neurosurg 2021 151 147 154 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.032 34023467 Porras JL, Pennington Z, Hung B, Hersh A, Schilling A, Goodwin CR, Sciubba DM (2021) Radiotherapy and Surgical advances in the treatment of metastatic spine tumors: a narrative review. World Neurosurg 151:147–154. 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.032 34023467 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.032

30. Chen AL Sagoo NS Vannabouathong C Reddy Y Deme S Patibandla S Passias PG Vira S Combination radiofrequency ablation and vertebral cement augmentation for spinal metastatic tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and treatment outcomes N Am Spine Soc J 2024 17 100317 10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100317 38510810 PMC10950794 Chen AL, Sagoo NS, Vannabouathong C, Reddy Y, Deme S, Patibandla S, Passias PG, Vira S (2024) Combination radiofrequency ablation and vertebral cement augmentation for spinal metastatic tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and treatment outcomes. N Am Spine Soc J 17:100317. 10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100317 38510810 10.1016/j.xnsj.2024.100317 PMC10950794

31. Yao Y Zhu X Zhang N Wang P Liu Z Chen Y Xu C Ouyang T Meng W Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for treating spinal metastases Med (Baltim) 2023 102 25 e34092 10.1097/MD.0000000000034092 PMC10289525 37352076 Yao Y, Zhu X, Zhang N, Wang P, Liu Z, Chen Y, Xu C, Ouyang T, Meng W (2023) Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for treating spinal metastases. Med (Baltim) 102(25):e34092. 10.1097/MD.0000000000034092 10.1097/MD.0000000000034092 PMC10289525 37352076

32. Elsamadicy AA Koo AB David WB Zogg CK Kundishora AJ Hong CS Kuzmik GA Gorrepati R Coutinho PO Kolb L Thirty- and 90-day readmissions after spinal surgery for spine metastases: a National Trend Analysis of 4423 patients Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2021 46 12 828 835 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003907 33394977 PMC8278805 Elsamadicy AA, Koo AB, David WB, Zogg CK, Kundishora AJ, Hong CS, Kuzmik GA, Gorrepati R, Coutinho PO, Kolb L et al (2021) Thirty- and 90-day readmissions after spinal surgery for spine metastases: a National Trend Analysis of 4423 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 46(12):828–835. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003907 33394977 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003907 PMC8278805

33. Lenschow M, Lenz M, von Spreckelsen N, Ossmann J, Meyer J, Keßling J, Nadjiri L, Telentschak S, Zarghooni K, Knöll P et al (2022) Impact of spinal instrumentation on neurological outcome in patients with intermediate spinal instability neoplastic score (SINS). Cancers (Basel) 14(9). 10.3390/cancers14092193 10.3390/cancers14092193 PMC9101027 35565322

34. Pranata R Lim MA Vania R Bagus Mahadewa TG Minimal invasive surgery Instrumented Fusion versus Conventional Open Surgical Instrumented Fusion for the treatment of spinal metastases: a systematic review and Meta-analysis World Neurosurg 2021 148 e264 e274 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.12.130 33418123 Pranata R, Lim MA, Vania R, Bagus Mahadewa TG (2021) Minimal invasive surgery Instrumented Fusion versus Conventional Open Surgical Instrumented Fusion for the treatment of spinal metastases: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 148:e264–e274. 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.12.130 33418123 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.12.130

35. Azad TD Varshneya K Ho AL Veeravagu A Sciubba DM Ratliff JK Laminectomy Versus Corpectomy for spinal metastatic Disease-Complications, costs, and Quality outcomes World Neurosurg 2019 131 e468 e473 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.206 31404695 Azad TD, Varshneya K, Ho AL, Veeravagu A, Sciubba DM, Ratliff JK (2019) Laminectomy Versus Corpectomy for spinal metastatic Disease-Complications, costs, and Quality outcomes. World Neurosurg 131:e468–e473. 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.206 31404695 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.206

36. Madhu S Thomas AC Tang SS Shen L Ramakrishnan SA Kumar N Analysis of short-term versus long-term readmission-free Survival after metastatic spine tumor surgery World Neurosurg 2022 158 e946 e955 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.119 34863936 Madhu S, Thomas AC, Tang SS, Shen L, Ramakrishnan SA, Kumar N (2022) Analysis of short-term versus long-term readmission-free Survival after metastatic spine tumor surgery. World Neurosurg 158:e946–e955. 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.119 34863936 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.119

37. Hobbs JG Patel AS Chaker AN Hasan N Kumar P Ramos E Mehta AI Steroid Use Associated with increased odds of 30-Day mortality in Surgical patients with metastatic spinal tumors in the setting of disseminated disease Neurosurgery 2019 85 3 394 401 10.1093/neuros/nyy353 30113676 Hobbs JG, Patel AS, Chaker AN, Hasan N, Kumar P, Ramos E, Mehta AI (2019) Steroid Use Associated with increased odds of 30-Day mortality in Surgical patients with metastatic spinal tumors in the setting of disseminated disease. Neurosurgery 85(3):394–401. 10.1093/neuros/nyy353 30113676 10.1093/neuros/nyy353

38. Chakravarthy VB Laufer I Amin AG Cohen MA Reiner AS Vuong C Persaud PS Ruppert LM Puttanniah VG Afonso AM Patient outcomes following implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for patients with metastatic spine tumors Cancer 2022 128 23 4109 4118 10.1002/cncr.34484 36219485 PMC10859187 Chakravarthy VB, Laufer I, Amin AG, Cohen MA, Reiner AS, Vuong C, Persaud PS, Ruppert LM, Puttanniah VG, Afonso AM et al (2022) Patient outcomes following implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for patients with metastatic spine tumors. Cancer 128(23):4109–4118. 10.1002/cncr.34484 36219485 10.1002/cncr.34484 PMC10859187

39. Chakravarthy VB Yokoi H Coughlin DJ Manlapaz MR Krishnaney AA Development and implementation of a comprehensive spine surgery enhanced recovery after surgery protocol: the Cleveland Clinic experience Neurosurg Focus 2019 46 4 E11 10.3171/2019.1.FOCUS18696 30933912 Chakravarthy VB, Yokoi H, Coughlin DJ, Manlapaz MR, Krishnaney AA (2019) Development and implementation of a comprehensive spine surgery enhanced recovery after surgery protocol: the Cleveland Clinic experience. Neurosurg Focus 46(4):E11. 10.3171/2019.1.FOCUS18696 30933912 10.3171/2019.1.FOCUS18696

40. Lafeuillee G, Desai M, Magni F, Knight S (2022) Challenge or opportunity: Rehabilitation outcomes in patients with metastatic spinal cord compression - a UK single center experience. J Spinal Cord Med 1–8. 10.1080/10790268.2022.2097997 10.1080/10790268.2022.2097997 PMC11044739 36260004

41. Itokazu M Higashimoto Y Ueda M Hanada K Murakami S Fukuda K Effectiveness of Rehabilitation for Cancer patients with bone metastasis Prog Rehabil Med 2022 7 20220027 10.2490/prm.20220027 35633758 PMC9113922 Itokazu M, Higashimoto Y, Ueda M, Hanada K, Murakami S, Fukuda K (2022) Effectiveness of Rehabilitation for Cancer patients with bone metastasis. Prog Rehabil Med 7:20220027. 10.2490/prm.20220027 35633758 10.2490/prm.20220027 PMC9113922

42. Maltoni M Caraceni A Brunelli C Broeckaert B Christakis N Eychmueller S Glare P Nabal M Viganò A Larkin P Prognostic factors in advanced cancer patients: evidence-based clinical recommendations–a study by the Steering Committee of the European Association for Palliative Care J Clin Oncol 2005 23 25 6240 6248 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.866 16135490 Maltoni M, Caraceni A, Brunelli C, Broeckaert B, Christakis N, Eychmueller S, Glare P, Nabal M, Viganò A, Larkin P et al (2005) Prognostic factors in advanced cancer patients: evidence-based clinical recommendations–a study by the Steering Committee of the European Association for Palliative Care. J Clin Oncol 23(25):6240–6248. 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.866 16135490 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.866

43. García-Baquero Merino MT Palliative Care: taking the long view Front Pharmacol 2018 9 1140 10.3389/fphar.2018.01140 30386237 PMC6198353 García-Baquero Merino MT (2018) Palliative Care: taking the long view. Front Pharmacol 9:1140. 10.3389/fphar.2018.01140 30386237 10.3389/fphar.2018.01140 PMC6198353

44. StatPearls. (2024)

45. Dowell D Ragan KR Jones CM Baldwin GT Chou RCDC Clinical practice Guideline for Prescribing opioids for Pain - United States, 2022 MMWR Recomm Rep 2022 71 3 1 95 10.15585/mmwr.rr7103a1 36327391 PMC9639433 Dowell D, Ragan KR, Jones CM, Baldwin GT, Chou RCDC (2022) Clinical practice Guideline for Prescribing opioids for Pain - United States, 2022. MMWR Recomm Rep 71(3):1–95. 10.15585/mmwr.rr7103a1 36327391 10.15585/mmwr.rr7103a1 PMC9639433

46. Barzilai O Laufer I Yamada Y Higginson DS Schmitt AM Lis E Bilsky MH Integrating evidence-based medicine for treatment of spinal metastases into a decision Framework: neurologic, oncologic, mechanicals Stability, and systemic disease J Clin Oncol 2017 35 21 2419 2427 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.7362 28640703 Barzilai O, Laufer I, Yamada Y, Higginson DS, Schmitt AM, Lis E, Bilsky MH (2017) Integrating evidence-based medicine for treatment of spinal metastases into a decision Framework: neurologic, oncologic, mechanicals Stability, and systemic disease. J Clin Oncol 35(21):2419–2427. 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.7362 28640703 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.7362

47. Maltoni M Scarpi E Modonesi C Passardi A Calpona S Turriziani A Speranza R Tassinari D Magnani P Saccani D A validation study of the WHO analgesic ladder: a two-step vs three-step strategy Support Care Cancer 2005 13 11 888 894 10.1007/s00520-005-0807-6 15818486 Maltoni M, Scarpi E, Modonesi C, Passardi A, Calpona S, Turriziani A, Speranza R, Tassinari D, Magnani P, Saccani D et al (2005) A validation study of the WHO analgesic ladder: a two-step vs three-step strategy. Support Care Cancer 13(11):888–894. 10.1007/s00520-005-0807-6 15818486 10.1007/s00520-005-0807-6

48. Hanks GW Conno F Cherny N Hanna M Kalso E McQuay HJ Mercadante S Meynadier J Poulain P Ripamonti C Morphine and alternative opioids in cancer pain: the EAPC recommendations Br J Cancer 2001 84 5 587 593 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1680 11237376 PMC2363790 Hanks GW, Conno F, Cherny N, Hanna M, Kalso E, McQuay HJ, Mercadante S, Meynadier J, Poulain P, Ripamonti C et al (2001) Morphine and alternative opioids in cancer pain: the EAPC recommendations. Br J Cancer 84(5):587–593. 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1680 11237376 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1680 PMC2363790

49. Ripamonti CI Santini D Maranzano E Berti M Roila F Group EG W. Management of cancer pain: ESMO Clinical Practice guidelines Ann Oncol 2012 23 Suppl 7 vii139 154 10.1093/annonc/mds233 22997447 Ripamonti CI, Santini D, Maranzano E, Berti M, Roila F, Group EG (2012) W. Management of cancer pain: ESMO Clinical Practice guidelines. Ann Oncol 23(Suppl 7):vii139–154. 10.1093/annonc/mds233 22997447 10.1093/annonc/mds233

50. Fallon M Giusti R Aielli F Hoskin P Rolke R Sharma M Ripamonti CI Committee EG Management of cancer pain in adult patients: ESMO Clinical Practice guidelines Ann Oncol 2018 29 Suppl 4 iv166 iv191 10.1093/annonc/mdy152 30052758 Fallon M, Giusti R, Aielli F, Hoskin P, Rolke R, Sharma M, Ripamonti CI, Committee EG (2018) Management of cancer pain in adult patients: ESMO Clinical Practice guidelines. Ann Oncol 29(Suppl 4):iv166–iv191. 10.1093/annonc/mdy152 30052758 10.1093/annonc/mdy152

51. Caraceni A Hanks G Kaasa S Bennett MI Brunelli C Cherny N Dale O De Conno F Fallon M Hanna M Use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of cancer pain: evidence-based recommendations from the EAPC Lancet Oncol 2012 13 2 e58 68 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70040-2 22300860 Caraceni A, Hanks G, Kaasa S, Bennett MI, Brunelli C, Cherny N, Dale O, De Conno F, Fallon M, Hanna M et al (2012) Use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of cancer pain: evidence-based recommendations from the EAPC. Lancet Oncol 13(2):e58–68. 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70040-2 22300860 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70040-2

52. Wakabayashi K Koide Y Aoyama T Shimizu H Miyauchi R Tanaka H Tachibana H Nakamura K Kodaira T A predictive model for pain response following radiotherapy for treatment of spinal metastases Sci Rep 2021 11 1 12908 10.1038/s41598-021-92363-0 34145367 PMC8213735 Wakabayashi K, Koide Y, Aoyama T, Shimizu H, Miyauchi R, Tanaka H, Tachibana H, Nakamura K, Kodaira T (2021) A predictive model for pain response following radiotherapy for treatment of spinal metastases. Sci Rep 11(1):12908. 10.1038/s41598-021-92363-0 34145367 10.1038/s41598-021-92363-0 PMC8213735

53. Nakata E Sugihara S Kataoka M Yamashita N Furumatsu T Takigawa T Tetsunaga T Ozaki T Early response assessment of palliative conventional radiotherapy for painful uncomplicated vertebral bone metastases J Orthop Sci 2018 23 6 912 917 10.1016/j.jos.2018.07.007 30078520 Nakata E, Sugihara S, Kataoka M, Yamashita N, Furumatsu T, Takigawa T, Tetsunaga T, Ozaki T (2018) Early response assessment of palliative conventional radiotherapy for painful uncomplicated vertebral bone metastases. J Orthop Sci 23(6):912–917. 10.1016/j.jos.2018.07.007 30078520 10.1016/j.jos.2018.07.007

54. Hartsell WF Scott CB Bruner DW Scarantino CW Ivker RA Roach M Suh JH Demas WF Movsas B Petersen IA Randomized trial of short- versus long-course radiotherapy for palliation of painful bone metastases J Natl Cancer Inst 2005 97 11 798 804 10.1093/jnci/dji139 15928300 Hartsell WF, Scott CB, Bruner DW, Scarantino CW, Ivker RA, Roach M, Suh JH, Demas WF, Movsas B, Petersen IA et al (2005) Randomized trial of short- versus long-course radiotherapy for palliation of painful bone metastases. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(11):798–804. 10.1093/jnci/dji139 15928300 10.1093/jnci/dji139

55. Zhao W Wang H Hu JH Peng ZH Chen JZ Huang JQ Jiang YN Luo G Yi GF Shen J Palliative pain relief and safety of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation combined with cement injection for bone metastasis Jpn J Clin Oncol 2018 48 8 753 759 10.1093/jjco/hyy090 29931084 Zhao W, Wang H, Hu JH, Peng ZH, Chen JZ, Huang JQ, Jiang YN, Luo G, Yi GF, Shen J et al (2018) Palliative pain relief and safety of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation combined with cement injection for bone metastasis. Jpn J Clin Oncol 48(8):753–759. 10.1093/jjco/hyy090 29931084 10.1093/jjco/hyy090

56. Levy J Hopkins T Morris J Tran ND David E Massari F Farid H Vogel A O’Connell WG Sunenshine P Radiofrequency ablation for the Palliative treatment of bone metastases: outcomes from the Multicenter OsteoCool Tumor ablation Post-market Study (OPuS one study) in 100 patients J Vasc Interv Radiol 2020 31 11 1745 1752 10.1016/j.jvir.2020.07.014 33129427 Levy J, Hopkins T, Morris J, Tran ND, David E, Massari F, Farid H, Vogel A, O’Connell WG, Sunenshine P et al (2020) Radiofrequency ablation for the Palliative treatment of bone metastases: outcomes from the Multicenter OsteoCool Tumor ablation Post-market Study (OPuS one study) in 100 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 31(11):1745–1752. 10.1016/j.jvir.2020.07.014 33129427 10.1016/j.jvir.2020.07.014

57. Giammalva GR Costanzo R Paolini F Benigno UE Porzio M Brunasso L Basile L Gulì C Pino MA Gerardi RM Management of spinal bone metastases with Radiofrequency ablation, vertebral reinforcement and transpedicular fixation: a retrospective single-Center Case Series Front Oncol 2021 11 818760 10.3389/fonc.2021.818760 35127531 PMC8814334 Giammalva GR, Costanzo R, Paolini F, Benigno UE, Porzio M, Brunasso L, Basile L, Gulì C, Pino MA, Gerardi RM et al (2021) Management of spinal bone metastases with Radiofrequency ablation, vertebral reinforcement and transpedicular fixation: a retrospective single-Center Case Series. Front Oncol 11:818760. 10.3389/fonc.2021.818760 35127531 10.3389/fonc.2021.818760 PMC8814334

58. Kam NM Maingard J Kok HK Ranatunga D Brooks D Torreggiani WC Munk PL Lee MJ Chandra RV Asadi H Combined vertebral augmentation and Radiofrequency ablation in the management of spinal metastases: an update Curr Treat Options Oncol 2017 18 12 74 10.1007/s11864-017-0516-7 29143901 Kam NM, Maingard J, Kok HK, Ranatunga D, Brooks D, Torreggiani WC, Munk PL, Lee MJ, Chandra RV, Asadi H (2017) Combined vertebral augmentation and Radiofrequency ablation in the management of spinal metastases: an update. Curr Treat Options Oncol 18(12):74. 10.1007/s11864-017-0516-7 29143901 10.1007/s11864-017-0516-7

59. Zhang X Ye X Zhang K Qiu Y Fan W Yuan Q Fan J Wu L Yang S Hu M Computed tomography–guided microwave ablation combined with Osteoplasty for the treatment of bone metastases: a Multicenter Clinical Study J Vasc Interv Radiol 2021 32 6 861 868 10.1016/j.jvir.2021.03.523 33771712 Zhang X, Ye X, Zhang K, Qiu Y, Fan W, Yuan Q, Fan J, Wu L, Yang S, Hu M et al (2021) Computed tomography–guided microwave ablation combined with Osteoplasty for the treatment of bone metastases: a Multicenter Clinical Study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 32(6):861–868. 10.1016/j.jvir.2021.03.523 33771712 10.1016/j.jvir.2021.03.523

60. Khan MA Deib G Deldar B Patel AM Barr JS Efficacy and safety of Percutaneous Microwave ablation and cementoplasty in the treatment of painful spinal metastases and Myeloma AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018 39 7 1376 1383 10.3174/ajnr.A5680 29794238 PMC7655455 Khan MA, Deib G, Deldar B, Patel AM, Barr JS (2018) Efficacy and safety of Percutaneous Microwave ablation and cementoplasty in the treatment of painful spinal metastases and Myeloma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 39(7):1376–1383. 10.3174/ajnr.A5680 29794238 10.3174/ajnr.A5680 PMC7655455

61. Autrusseau PA Cazzato RL De Marini P Auloge P Koch G Dalili D Weiss J Mayer T Garnon J Gangi A Pain relief and local tumour control following percutaneous image-guided cryoablation for spine metastasis: a 12-year single-centre experience Clin Radiol 2021 76 9 674 680 10.1016/j.crad.2021.05.013 34120732 Autrusseau PA, Cazzato RL, De Marini P, Auloge P, Koch G, Dalili D, Weiss J, Mayer T, Garnon J, Gangi A (2021) Pain relief and local tumour control following percutaneous image-guided cryoablation for spine metastasis: a 12-year single-centre experience. Clin Radiol 76(9):674–680. 10.1016/j.crad.2021.05.013 34120732 10.1016/j.crad.2021.05.013

62. Eisenberg E Berkey CS Carr DB Mosteller F Chalmers TC Efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs for cancer pain: a meta-analysis J Clin Oncol 1994 12 12 2756 2765 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.12.2756 7989953 Eisenberg E, Berkey CS, Carr DB, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC (1994) Efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs for cancer pain: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 12(12):2756–2765. 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.12.2756 7989953 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.12.2756

63. Porta-Sales J Garzón-Rodríguez C Llorens-Torromé S Brunelli C Pigni A Caraceni A Evidence on the analgesic role of bisphosphonates and denosumab in the treatment of pain due to bone metastases: a systematic review within the European Association for Palliative Care guidelines project Palliat Med 2017 31 1 5 25 10.1177/0269216316639793 27006430 Porta-Sales J, Garzón-Rodríguez C, Llorens-Torromé S, Brunelli C, Pigni A, Caraceni A (2017) Evidence on the analgesic role of bisphosphonates and denosumab in the treatment of pain due to bone metastases: a systematic review within the European Association for Palliative Care guidelines project. Palliat Med 31(1):5–25. 10.1177/0269216316639793 27006430 10.1177/0269216316639793

64. Ripamonti CI Maniezzo M Campa T Fagnoni E Brunelli C Saibene G Bareggi C Ascani L Cislaghi E Decreased occurrence of osteonecrosis of the jaw after implementation of dental preventive measures in solid tumour patients with bone metastases treated with bisphosphonates. The experience of the National Cancer Institute of Milan Ann Oncol 2009 20 1 137 145 10.1093/annonc/mdn526 18647964 Ripamonti CI, Maniezzo M, Campa T, Fagnoni E, Brunelli C, Saibene G, Bareggi C, Ascani L, Cislaghi E (2009) Decreased occurrence of osteonecrosis of the jaw after implementation of dental preventive measures in solid tumour patients with bone metastases treated with bisphosphonates. The experience of the National Cancer Institute of Milan. Ann Oncol 20(1):137–145. 10.1093/annonc/mdn526 18647964 10.1093/annonc/mdn526

65. Wong R Wiffen PJ Bisphosphonates for the relief of pain secondary to bone metastases Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002 2002 2 CD002068 10.1002/14651858.CD002068 12076438 PMC6483200 Wong R, Wiffen PJ (2002) Bisphosphonates for the relief of pain secondary to bone metastases. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002(2):CD002068. 10.1002/14651858.CD002068 12076438 10.1002/14651858.CD002068 PMC6483200

66. Dimopoulos MA Kastritis E Bamia C Melakopoulos I Gika D Roussou M Migkou M Eleftherakis-Papaiakovou E Christoulas D Terpos E Reduction of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) after implementation of preventive measures in patients with multiple myeloma treated with zoledronic acid Ann Oncol 2009 20 1 117 120 10.1093/annonc/mdn554 18689864 Dimopoulos MA, Kastritis E, Bamia C, Melakopoulos I, Gika D, Roussou M, Migkou M, Eleftherakis-Papaiakovou E, Christoulas D, Terpos E et al (2009) Reduction of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) after implementation of preventive measures in patients with multiple myeloma treated with zoledronic acid. Ann Oncol 20(1):117–120. 10.1093/annonc/mdn554 18689864 10.1093/annonc/mdn554

67. Henry DH Costa L Goldwasser F Hirsh V Hungria V Prausova J Scagliotti GV Sleeboom H Spencer A Vadhan-Raj S Randomized, double-blind study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced cancer (excluding breast and prostate cancer) or multiple myeloma J Clin Oncol 2011 29 9 1125 1132 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.3304 21343556 Henry DH, Costa L, Goldwasser F, Hirsh V, Hungria V, Prausova J, Scagliotti GV, Sleeboom H, Spencer A, Vadhan-Raj S et al (2011) Randomized, double-blind study of denosumab versus zoledronic acid in the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced cancer (excluding breast and prostate cancer) or multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 29(9):1125–1132. 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.3304 21343556 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.3304

68. Stopeck AT Lipton A Body JJ Steger GG Tonkin K de Boer RH Lichinitser M Fujiwara Y Yardley DA Viniegra M Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study J Clin Oncol 2010 28 35 5132 5139 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.7101 21060033 Stopeck AT, Lipton A, Body JJ, Steger GG, Tonkin K, de Boer RH, Lichinitser M, Fujiwara Y, Yardley DA, Viniegra M et al (2010) Denosumab compared with zoledronic acid for the treatment of bone metastases in patients with advanced breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind study. J Clin Oncol 28(35):5132–5139. 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.7101 21060033 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.7101

69. Fizazi K Carducci M Smith M Damião R Brown J Karsh L Milecki P Shore N Rader M Wang H Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study Lancet 2011 377 9768 813 822 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62344-6 21353695 PMC3090685 Fizazi K, Carducci M, Smith M, Damião R, Brown J, Karsh L, Milecki P, Shore N, Rader M, Wang H et al (2011) Denosumab versus zoledronic acid for treatment of bone metastases in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomised, double-blind study. Lancet 377(9768):813–822. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62344-6 21353695 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62344-6 PMC3090685

70. Yoon SY Oh J Neuropathic cancer pain: prevalence, pathophysiology, and management Korean J Intern Med 2018 33 6 1058 1069 10.3904/kjim.2018.162 29929349 PMC6234399 Yoon SY, Oh J (2018) Neuropathic cancer pain: prevalence, pathophysiology, and management. Korean J Intern Med 33(6):1058–1069. 10.3904/kjim.2018.162 29929349 10.3904/kjim.2018.162 PMC6234399

71. Shkodra M, Caraceni A (2022) Treatment of Neuropathic Pain directly due to Cancer: an update. Cancers (Basel) 14(8). 10.3390/cancers14081992 10.3390/cancers14081992 PMC9031615 35454894

72. Dev R Del Fabbro E Bruera E Patient-controlled analgesia in patients with advanced cancer. Should patients be in control? J Pain Symptom Manage 2011 42 2 296 300 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.11.020 21444180 Dev R, Del Fabbro E, Bruera E (2011) Patient-controlled analgesia in patients with advanced cancer. Should patients be in control? J Pain Symptom Manage 42(2):296–300. 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.11.020 21444180 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.11.020

73. Sousa AM de Santana Neto J Guimaraes GM Cascudo GM Neto JO Ashmawi HA Safety profile of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for breakthrough pain in cancer patients: a case series study Support Care Cancer 2014 22 3 795 801 10.1007/s00520-013-2036-8 24258354 Sousa AM, de Santana Neto J, Guimaraes GM, Cascudo GM, Neto JO, Ashmawi HA (2014) Safety profile of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for breakthrough pain in cancer patients: a case series study. Support Care Cancer 22(3):795–801. 10.1007/s00520-013-2036-8 24258354 10.1007/s00520-013-2036-8

74. Chen X Yao J Xin Y Ma G Yu Y Yang Y Shu X Cao H Postoperative Pain in patients undergoing Cancer surgery and intravenous patient-controlled Analgesia Use: the First and Second 24 h experiences Pain Ther 2023 12 1 275 292 10.1007/s40122-022-00459-w 36447043 PMC9845484 Chen X, Yao J, Xin Y, Ma G, Yu Y, Yang Y, Shu X, Cao H (2023) Postoperative Pain in patients undergoing Cancer surgery and intravenous patient-controlled Analgesia Use: the First and Second 24 h experiences. Pain Ther 12(1):275–292. 10.1007/s40122-022-00459-w 36447043 10.1007/s40122-022-00459-w PMC9845484

75. Hagedorn JM Pittelkow TP Hunt CL D’Souza RS Lamer TJ Current perspectives on spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of Cancer Pain J Pain Res 2020 13 3295 3305 10.2147/JPR.S263857 33324090 PMC7732175 Hagedorn JM, Pittelkow TP, Hunt CL, D’Souza RS, Lamer TJ (2020) Current perspectives on spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of Cancer Pain. J Pain Res 13:3295–3305. 10.2147/JPR.S263857 33324090 10.2147/JPR.S263857 PMC7732175

76. Aman MM Mahmoud A Deer T Sayed D Hagedorn JM Brogan SE Singh V Gulati A Strand N Weisbein J The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) best practices and guidelines for the Interventional Management of Cancer-Associated Pain J Pain Res 2021 14 2139 2164 10.2147/JPR.S315585 34295184 PMC8292624 Aman MM, Mahmoud A, Deer T, Sayed D, Hagedorn JM, Brogan SE, Singh V, Gulati A, Strand N, Weisbein J et al (2021) The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) best practices and guidelines for the Interventional Management of Cancer-Associated Pain. J Pain Res 14:2139–2164. 10.2147/JPR.S315585 34295184 10.2147/JPR.S315585 PMC8292624

77. Ahmad I, Ahmed MM, Ahsraf MF, Naeem A, Tasleem A, Ahmed M, Farooqi MS (2018) Pain Management in Metastatic Bone Disease: A literature review. Cureus 10(9). 10.7759/cureus.3286. e3286 10.7759/cureus.3286 PMC6235631 30443456