P.151 对脊柱肿瘤人群中虚弱和肌肉疏松症应用的批判性评估

MA MacLean, AJ Charles, M. Georgiopoulos, J. Phinney, R. Charest-Morin, C. Goodwin, MH Weber
{"title":"P.151 对脊柱肿瘤人群中虚弱和肌肉疏松症应用的批判性评估","authors":"MA MacLean, AJ Charles, M. Georgiopoulos, J. Phinney, R. Charest-Morin, C. Goodwin, MH Weber","doi":"10.1017/cjn.2024.250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Frailty and sarcopenia predict worse surgical outcomes among spinal degenerative and deformity-related populations; this association is less clear in the context of spinal oncology. Here, we identified frailty and sarcopenia tools applied in spinal oncology and appraised their clinimetric properties. Methods: A systematic review was conducted from January 1st, 2000, until June 2022. Study characteristics, frailty tools, measures of sarcopenia, component domains, individual items, cut-off values, and measurement techniques were collected. Clinimetric assessment was performed according to Consensus-based Standards for Health Measurement Instruments. Results: Twenty-two studies were included (42,514 patients). The three most employed frailty tools were the Metastatic Spine tumor Frailty Index (MSTFI), Modified Frailty Index-11 (mFI-11), and the mFI-5. The three most common sarcopenia measures were the L3-Total Psoas Area (TPA)/Vertebral Body Area (VBA), L3-TPA/Height2, and L3-Spinal Muscle Index (L3-Cross-Sectional Muscle Area/Height2). Frailty and sarcopenia measures lacked content and construct validity. Positive predictive validity was observed in select studies employing the HFRS, mFI-5, MSTFI, and L3-TPA/VBA. All frailty tools had floor or ceiling effects. Conclusions: Existing tools for evaluating frailty and sarcopenia in surgical spine oncology have poor clinimetric properties. Here, we provide a pragmatic approach to utilizing existing frailty and sarcopenia tools, until more clinimetrically robust instruments are developed.","PeriodicalId":9571,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques","volume":"7 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P.151 A critical appraisal of the application of frailty and sarcopenia in the spinal oncology population\",\"authors\":\"MA MacLean, AJ Charles, M. Georgiopoulos, J. Phinney, R. Charest-Morin, C. Goodwin, MH Weber\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cjn.2024.250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Frailty and sarcopenia predict worse surgical outcomes among spinal degenerative and deformity-related populations; this association is less clear in the context of spinal oncology. Here, we identified frailty and sarcopenia tools applied in spinal oncology and appraised their clinimetric properties. Methods: A systematic review was conducted from January 1st, 2000, until June 2022. Study characteristics, frailty tools, measures of sarcopenia, component domains, individual items, cut-off values, and measurement techniques were collected. Clinimetric assessment was performed according to Consensus-based Standards for Health Measurement Instruments. Results: Twenty-two studies were included (42,514 patients). The three most employed frailty tools were the Metastatic Spine tumor Frailty Index (MSTFI), Modified Frailty Index-11 (mFI-11), and the mFI-5. The three most common sarcopenia measures were the L3-Total Psoas Area (TPA)/Vertebral Body Area (VBA), L3-TPA/Height2, and L3-Spinal Muscle Index (L3-Cross-Sectional Muscle Area/Height2). Frailty and sarcopenia measures lacked content and construct validity. Positive predictive validity was observed in select studies employing the HFRS, mFI-5, MSTFI, and L3-TPA/VBA. All frailty tools had floor or ceiling effects. Conclusions: Existing tools for evaluating frailty and sarcopenia in surgical spine oncology have poor clinimetric properties. Here, we provide a pragmatic approach to utilizing existing frailty and sarcopenia tools, until more clinimetrically robust instruments are developed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques\",\"volume\":\"7 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2024.250\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cjn.2024.250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在脊柱退行性病变和畸形相关人群中,虚弱和肌肉疏松症预示着较差的手术效果;而在脊柱肿瘤学中,这种关联并不明显。在此,我们确定了应用于脊柱肿瘤学的虚弱和肌肉疏松症工具,并评估了其临床测量特性。方法:我们对 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 6 月期间的研究进行了系统回顾。收集了研究特征、虚弱工具、肌肉疏松症测量方法、组成域、单个项目、临界值和测量技术。临床评估根据基于共识的健康测量工具标准进行。结果:共纳入 22 项研究(42514 名患者)。使用最多的三种虚弱工具是转移性脊柱肿瘤虚弱指数(MSTFI)、改良虚弱指数-11(mFI-11)和 mFI-5。三种最常见的肌肉疏松测量方法是 L3-腰肌总面积(TPA)/椎体面积(VBA)、L3-TPA/身高2 和 L3-脊髓肌肉指数(L3-横断面肌肉面积/身高2)。虚弱和肌肉疏松测量缺乏内容有效性和结构有效性。在采用 HFRS、mFI-5、MSTFI 和 L3-TPA/VBA 的部分研究中观察到了积极的预测有效性。所有的虚弱工具都存在最低或最高效应。结论:现有的脊柱肿瘤外科虚弱和肌肉疏松症评估工具的临床测量属性较差。在此,我们提供了一种实用的方法来利用现有的虚弱和肌肉疏松工具,直到开发出临床测量性能更强的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
P.151 A critical appraisal of the application of frailty and sarcopenia in the spinal oncology population
Background: Frailty and sarcopenia predict worse surgical outcomes among spinal degenerative and deformity-related populations; this association is less clear in the context of spinal oncology. Here, we identified frailty and sarcopenia tools applied in spinal oncology and appraised their clinimetric properties. Methods: A systematic review was conducted from January 1st, 2000, until June 2022. Study characteristics, frailty tools, measures of sarcopenia, component domains, individual items, cut-off values, and measurement techniques were collected. Clinimetric assessment was performed according to Consensus-based Standards for Health Measurement Instruments. Results: Twenty-two studies were included (42,514 patients). The three most employed frailty tools were the Metastatic Spine tumor Frailty Index (MSTFI), Modified Frailty Index-11 (mFI-11), and the mFI-5. The three most common sarcopenia measures were the L3-Total Psoas Area (TPA)/Vertebral Body Area (VBA), L3-TPA/Height2, and L3-Spinal Muscle Index (L3-Cross-Sectional Muscle Area/Height2). Frailty and sarcopenia measures lacked content and construct validity. Positive predictive validity was observed in select studies employing the HFRS, mFI-5, MSTFI, and L3-TPA/VBA. All frailty tools had floor or ceiling effects. Conclusions: Existing tools for evaluating frailty and sarcopenia in surgical spine oncology have poor clinimetric properties. Here, we provide a pragmatic approach to utilizing existing frailty and sarcopenia tools, until more clinimetrically robust instruments are developed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信