Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 156, Issue 11, pp 2159–2164 | Cite as

En bloc resection of primary malignant bone tumors of the cervical spine

  • Tobias A. MatteiEmail author
  • Ehud Mendel
How I Do it - Spine



Due to the poor response of primary malignant bone tumors to adjuvant therapies, surgical resection performed in an en bloc fashion with free margins remains the best option for long-term recurrence-free survival of patients harboring such lesions.


In this article the authors provide a stepwise review of the technical details involved in the performance of en bloc resections of tumoral lesions in the cervical spine.


Due to the anatomical peculiarities of the cervical spine related to the presence of functional nerve roots as well as the vertebral arteries, en bloc resections in this region remains a challenging surgical procedure.


Primary bone tumors en bloc resection Chordoma Chondrosarcoma Subaxial cervical spine Spinal tumors 


Conflicts of interest


Supplementary material

Video 1

Video demonstrating the pre, intra, and post-operative images of the patient presented in Figs 1 to 6. She was a 66-year-old female with chronic neck pain in whom an MRi of the cervical spine revealed the presence of a tumoral lesion involving only the left portion of the C4 vertebral body. A CT-guided core needle biopsy revealed the diagnosis of a chondrosarcoma. At that time the patient refused surgery and received radiosurgery elsewhere. Two years later she returned to our clinic presenting significant worsening of the neck pain as well as left deltoid weakness. The new MRi revealed significant growth of the lesion, which, at that point, involved also the C3, C4, and C5 vertebral bodies as well as the left vertebral artery and the left C3, C4, and C5 nerve roots. After a new core needle biopsy confirming the diagnosis of a low-grade chondrosarcoma, a lengthy conversation was conducted with the family in order to discuss the risks and benefits of a possible en bloc resection of the lesion. This procedure was planned to be executed in four different stages: a posterior approach for an occipito-T3 fixation, an endovascular occlusion of the left vertebral artery; a new posterior approach for laminectomy, tumor dissection, ligation of the left C3, C4, and C5 nerve roots as well as the left vertebral artery, initiation of the C2–C3 and C5–C6 discectomies from the back and implantation of a silastic sheet between the spinal cord and the posterior longitudinal ligament, and, finally, an anterior cervical approach for en bloc removal of the lesion and reconstruction of the spinal column with a distractable cage and C2–C6 plating. At the 2-month post-operative follow-up, the patient had normal biceps, triceps, and hand grasp function on the left arm, although, as expected, she still presented complete deltoid paralysis. The tracheostomy and gastrostomy (PEG) tube had already been removed, and there were no respiratory issues or signs of diaphragm paralysis on the left side that could be attributed to the ligation of the C3 and C4 nerve roots. Due to the close margin of resection on the medial aspect of the tumor (as revealed by the immunohistochemical analysis of the specimen), the patient is currently under close follow-up with serial MRis; in the case of recurrence, the team may indicate adjuvant proton-beam radiotherapy. (MP4 21694 kb)


  1. 1.
    Abdu WA, Provencher M (1998) Primary bone and metastatic tumors of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23:2767–2777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boriani S, Bandiera S, Donthineni R, Amendola L, Cappuccio M, De Iure F, Gasbarrini A (2010) Morbidity of en bloc resections in the spine. Eur Spine J 19:231–241PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boriani S, Saravanja D, Yamada Y, Varga PP, Biagini R, Fisher CG (2009) Challenges of local recurrence and cure in low grade malignant tumors of the spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:S48–S57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dreghorn CR, Newman RJ, Hardy GJ, Dickson RA (1990) Primary tumors of the axial skeleton. Experience of the Leeds regional bone tumor registry. Spine 15:137–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jiang L, Liu ZJ, Liu XG, Ma QJ, Wei F, Lv Y, Dang GT (2009) Upper cervical spine chordoma of C2-C3. Eur Spine J 18:293–298PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Neo M, Asato R, Honda K, Kataoka K, Fujibayashi S, Nakamura T (2007) Transmaxillary and transmandibular approach to a C1 chordoma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:E236–E239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yamazaki T, McLoughlin GS, Patel S, Rhines LD, Fourney DR (2009) Feasibility and safety of en bloc resection for primary spine tumors: a systematic review by the Spine Oncology Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:S31–S38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yang X, Wu Z, Xiao J, Feng D, Huang Q, Zheng W, Chen H, Yuan W, Jia L (2012) Chondrosarcomas of the cervical and cervicothoracic spine: surgical management and long-term clinical outcome. J Spinal Disord Tech 25:1–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yoshihara H, Passias PG, Errico TJ (2013) Screw-related complications in the subaxial cervical spine with the use of lateral mass versus cervical pedicle screws. J Neurosurg Spine 19:614–623PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zileli M, Kilinçer C, Ersahin Y, Cagli S (2007) Primary tumors of the cervical spine: a retrospective review of 35 surgically managed cases. Spine J 7:165–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryBrain & Spine Institute – InvisionHealthBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Department of Neurological Surgery - The Ohio State University - Wexner Medical Center/The James Cancer CenterColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations