Accuracy of Preoperative Scoring Systems for the Prognostication and Treatment of Patients with Spinal Metastases.

International Scholarly Research Notices Pub Date : 2017-08-15 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2017/1320684
Catherine S Hibberd, Gerald M Y Quan
{"title":"Accuracy of Preoperative Scoring Systems for the Prognostication and Treatment of Patients with Spinal Metastases.","authors":"Catherine S Hibberd,&nbsp;Gerald M Y Quan","doi":"10.1155/2017/1320684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In patients with spinal metastatic disease, survival prognosis is a key consideration in selection for surgery and determining the extent of treatment. Individual survival prediction however remains difficult. We sought to validate the prognostic accuracy of seven preoperative scoring systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>61 patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative scores were calculated for Tokuhashi, Revised Tokuhashi, Bauer, Modified Bauer, Sioutos, Tomita, and van der Linden scoring systems. Prognostic value was determined by comparison of predicted and actual survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Revised Tokuhashi and Modified Bauer scoring systems had the best survival predictive accuracy. Rate of agreement for survival prognosis was the greatest for the Modified Bauer score. There was a significant difference in survival of the prognostic groups for all but the van der Linden score, being most significant for the Revised Tokuhashi, Bauer, Modified Bauer, and Tomita scoring systems (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, the scoring systems are accurate at differentiating patients into short-, intermediate-, and long-term survivors. More precise prediction of actual survival is limited and the decision for or against surgery should never be based on survival prognostication alone but should take into account symptoms such as neurological deficit or pain from pathological fracture and instability.</p>","PeriodicalId":14433,"journal":{"name":"International Scholarly Research Notices","volume":"2017 ","pages":"1320684"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/1320684","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Scholarly Research Notices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1320684","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Background: In patients with spinal metastatic disease, survival prognosis is a key consideration in selection for surgery and determining the extent of treatment. Individual survival prediction however remains difficult. We sought to validate the prognostic accuracy of seven preoperative scoring systems.

Methods: 61 patients surgically treated for spinal metastases were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative scores were calculated for Tokuhashi, Revised Tokuhashi, Bauer, Modified Bauer, Sioutos, Tomita, and van der Linden scoring systems. Prognostic value was determined by comparison of predicted and actual survival.

Results: The Revised Tokuhashi and Modified Bauer scoring systems had the best survival predictive accuracy. Rate of agreement for survival prognosis was the greatest for the Modified Bauer score. There was a significant difference in survival of the prognostic groups for all but the van der Linden score, being most significant for the Revised Tokuhashi, Bauer, Modified Bauer, and Tomita scoring systems (p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusion: Overall, the scoring systems are accurate at differentiating patients into short-, intermediate-, and long-term survivors. More precise prediction of actual survival is limited and the decision for or against surgery should never be based on survival prognostication alone but should take into account symptoms such as neurological deficit or pain from pathological fracture and instability.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
术前评分系统对脊柱转移患者预后和治疗的准确性。
背景:在脊柱转移性疾病患者中,生存预后是选择手术和确定治疗范围的关键考虑因素。然而,个体生存预测仍然很困难。我们试图验证七个术前评分系统的预后准确性。方法:回顾性分析61例脊柱转移瘤手术治疗的临床资料。术前采用Tokuhashi、Revised Tokuhashi、Bauer、Modified Bauer、Sioutos、Tomita和van der Linden评分系统计算评分。通过比较预测生存期和实际生存期来确定预后价值。结果:改进的Tokuhashi和改进的Bauer评分系统具有最佳的生存预测准确性。改良Bauer评分对生存预后的符合率最高。除van der Linden评分外,所有预后组的生存率均有显著差异,其中修订Tokuhashi、Bauer、修正Bauer和Tomita评分系统的生存率差异最大(p≤0.001)。结论:总的来说,评分系统在区分患者为短期、中期和长期幸存者方面是准确的。对实际生存的更精确的预测是有限的,手术的决定不应该仅仅基于生存预测,而应该考虑到神经功能障碍或病理性骨折和不稳定引起的疼痛等症状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Retracted: Properties of PbS: Ni2+ Nanocrystals in Thin Films by Chemical Bath Deposition Retracted: Necrotizing Fasciitis: Diagnostic Challenges and Current Practices Corrigendum to “Correlation between First and Second Trimester Uterine Artery Doppler Velocimetry and Placental Bed Histopathology” Retracted: Innovative Therapies against Human Glioblastoma Multiforme Retracted: Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1