Background: The combination of surgery and radiation therapy is a common clinical practice in the treatment of spinal tumors. Although it is known that metallic implants disturb radiation therapy beams, it is not known what kind of dose distributions appear with spinal irradiation in the presence of a spinal implant. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of various spinal implant constructs on the dose of radiation delivered to the spinal canal in a single-level metastasis model.

Methods: We performed four spinal implant reconstructions on standard sawbones spine models: posterior instrumentation without anterior column reconstruction, posterior instrumentation with anterior column reconstruction with use of a titanium cage, anterior instrumentation with anterior column reconstruction with use of a titanium cage, and anterior instrumentation with anterior column reconstruction with use of chest tubes filled with bone cement. Irradiation with two different radiation therapy units (a cobalt-60 teletherapy unit and a linear accelerator) was performed twice for each model in a posterior-to-anterior direction, and thermoluminescent dosimeters were used to measure the dose changes in the anterior, middle, and posterior portions of the spinal canal.

Results: Compared with the sawbones-only model, the posterior instrumentation reconstructions resulted in a 5% to 7% decrease in the radiation dose delivered to the spinal canal with both radiation therapy units, whereas the anterior instrumentation reconstructions resulted in a 1% decrease in the dose delivered with the linear accelerator unit and a =2% increase in the dose delivered with the cobalt-60 teletherapy unit. When thermoluminescent dosimeters in the middle of the spinal canal were evaluated individually, anterior instrumentation with anterior column reconstruction with use of bone cement-filled chest tubes resulted in a 5.5% increase in the radiation dose delivered with the cobalt-60 teletherapy unit, whereas all of the other instrumentation models resulted in a <1% disturbance in the radiation dose delivered with both radiation therapy units.

Conclusions: The posterior instrumentation systems did not result in the delivery of an increased dose of radiation to the spinal cord, suggesting that current radiation therapy regimens may be performed without additional harm. The anterior instrumentation systems also appeared to be relatively safe when irradiation was performed with the linear accelerator unit. However, when irradiation was performed with use of the cobalt-60 teletherapy unit, there was an increase in the dose of radiation delivered to the spinal canal in the presence of the anterior instrumentation systems, particularly the anterior column reconstruction with use of bone cement-filled chest tubes. These dose-perturbation characteristics might be important to consider during the calculation of radiation therapy protocols for patients who are going to receive high doses or recurrent treatments that would reach the tolerance limits of the spinal cord.