利用 978 名住院患者对预测术后 30 天发病率的病理性骨折死亡率指数进行外部验证。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Joseph O Werenski, Marie W Su, Ryan K Krueger, Olivier Q Groot, Marilee J Clunk, Alisha Sodhi, Ruhi Patil, Nicole Bell, Adam S Levin, Santiago A Lozano-Calderon
{"title":"利用 978 名住院患者对预测术后 30 天发病率的病理性骨折死亡率指数进行外部验证。","authors":"Joseph O Werenski, Marie W Su, Ryan K Krueger, Olivier Q Groot, Marilee J Clunk, Alisha Sodhi, Ruhi Patil, Nicole Bell, Adam S Levin, Santiago A Lozano-Calderon","doi":"10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-01131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Skeletal metastases increase the risk of pathologic fractures, causing functional impairment and pain. Predicting morbidity in patients undergoing surgical fixation for these fractures is challenging due to the complexity of metastatic disease. The Pathologic Fracture Mortality Index (PFMI) was developed to predict 30-day postoperative morbidity in long bone fractures caused by metastases. External validation is necessary for clinical use. This study aims to evaluate the following: (1) How well does the PFMI predict 30-day medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity after pathologic fracture fixation in an external cohort of patients with long bone metastases? (2) How does the performance of the PFMI compare to established predictive indices including the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification score, the modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mF-I5), and the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (mCCI)?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed 978 patients who underwent internal fixation for pathologic fractures at two urban tertiary centers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for each predictive index to assess their accuracy in predicting 30-day morbidity across medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All four predictive indices demonstrated suboptimal performance, with AUC values ranging from 0.51-0.62, 0.45-0.51, 0.51-0.62, and 0.50-0.57 for medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity, respectively. The PFMI outperformed the ASA (P < 0.001), mF-I5 (P = 0.018), and mCCI (P = 0.034) in predicting utilization morbidity. It also better predicted medical (P = 0.021) and all-cause (P = 0.009) morbidity than ASA but did not outperform mF-I5 or mCCI in these areas. The PFMI did not surpass any indices in surgical morbidity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>None of the indices reached the ideal AUC of 0.80 for any morbidity type, emphasizing the need for refinement. Updating these tools with contemporary data and exploring new prognostic factors is critical to improve morbidity risk stratification in metastatic bone disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":51098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An External Validation of the Pathologic Fracture Mortality Index for Predicting 30-day Postoperative Morbidity Using 978 Institutional Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Joseph O Werenski, Marie W Su, Ryan K Krueger, Olivier Q Groot, Marilee J Clunk, Alisha Sodhi, Ruhi Patil, Nicole Bell, Adam S Levin, Santiago A Lozano-Calderon\",\"doi\":\"10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-01131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Skeletal metastases increase the risk of pathologic fractures, causing functional impairment and pain. Predicting morbidity in patients undergoing surgical fixation for these fractures is challenging due to the complexity of metastatic disease. The Pathologic Fracture Mortality Index (PFMI) was developed to predict 30-day postoperative morbidity in long bone fractures caused by metastases. External validation is necessary for clinical use. This study aims to evaluate the following: (1) How well does the PFMI predict 30-day medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity after pathologic fracture fixation in an external cohort of patients with long bone metastases? (2) How does the performance of the PFMI compare to established predictive indices including the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification score, the modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mF-I5), and the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (mCCI)?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed 978 patients who underwent internal fixation for pathologic fractures at two urban tertiary centers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for each predictive index to assess their accuracy in predicting 30-day morbidity across medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause categories.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All four predictive indices demonstrated suboptimal performance, with AUC values ranging from 0.51-0.62, 0.45-0.51, 0.51-0.62, and 0.50-0.57 for medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity, respectively. The PFMI outperformed the ASA (P < 0.001), mF-I5 (P = 0.018), and mCCI (P = 0.034) in predicting utilization morbidity. It also better predicted medical (P = 0.021) and all-cause (P = 0.009) morbidity than ASA but did not outperform mF-I5 or mCCI in these areas. The PFMI did not surpass any indices in surgical morbidity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>None of the indices reached the ideal AUC of 0.80 for any morbidity type, emphasizing the need for refinement. Updating these tools with contemporary data and exploring new prognostic factors is critical to improve morbidity risk stratification in metastatic bone disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51098,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-01131\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-01131","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

骨转移增加病理性骨折的风险,引起功能损伤和疼痛。由于转移性疾病的复杂性,预测这些骨折的手术固定患者的发病率是具有挑战性的。病理性骨折死亡率指数(PFMI)用于预测转移性长骨骨折术后30天的发病率。外部验证对于临床使用是必要的。本研究旨在评估以下内容:(1)在长骨转移患者的外部队列中,PFMI预测病理性骨折固定后30天的医疗、手术、使用和全因发病率的效果如何?(2) PFMI与美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分类评分、改良的5项衰弱指数(mF-I5)和改良的Charlson共病指数(mCCI)等已有的预测指标相比,其表现如何?方法:我们分析了978例在两个城市三级中心接受病理性骨折内固定的患者。计算每个预测指标的受者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC),以评估其在预测30天内医疗、手术、利用和全因类别发病率方面的准确性。结果:所有四项预测指标均表现不佳,对于内科、外科、利用和全因发病率,AUC分别为0.51-0.62、0.45-0.51、0.51-0.62和0.50-0.57。PFMI在预测用药发病率方面优于ASA (P < 0.001)、mF-I5 (P = 0.018)和mCCI (P = 0.034)。与ASA相比,它也能更好地预测医学(P = 0.021)和全因(P = 0.009)发病率,但在这些领域并不优于mF-I5或mCCI。PFMI在手术发病率方面没有超过任何指标。结论:所有指标均未达到0.80的理想AUC,需要进一步完善。用当代数据更新这些工具并探索新的预后因素对于改善转移性骨病的发病率风险分层至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An External Validation of the Pathologic Fracture Mortality Index for Predicting 30-day Postoperative Morbidity Using 978 Institutional Patients.

Introduction: Skeletal metastases increase the risk of pathologic fractures, causing functional impairment and pain. Predicting morbidity in patients undergoing surgical fixation for these fractures is challenging due to the complexity of metastatic disease. The Pathologic Fracture Mortality Index (PFMI) was developed to predict 30-day postoperative morbidity in long bone fractures caused by metastases. External validation is necessary for clinical use. This study aims to evaluate the following: (1) How well does the PFMI predict 30-day medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity after pathologic fracture fixation in an external cohort of patients with long bone metastases? (2) How does the performance of the PFMI compare to established predictive indices including the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification score, the modified 5-Item Frailty Index (mF-I5), and the modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (mCCI)?

Methods: We analyzed 978 patients who underwent internal fixation for pathologic fractures at two urban tertiary centers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was calculated for each predictive index to assess their accuracy in predicting 30-day morbidity across medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause categories.

Results: All four predictive indices demonstrated suboptimal performance, with AUC values ranging from 0.51-0.62, 0.45-0.51, 0.51-0.62, and 0.50-0.57 for medical, surgical, utilization, and all-cause morbidity, respectively. The PFMI outperformed the ASA (P < 0.001), mF-I5 (P = 0.018), and mCCI (P = 0.034) in predicting utilization morbidity. It also better predicted medical (P = 0.021) and all-cause (P = 0.009) morbidity than ASA but did not outperform mF-I5 or mCCI in these areas. The PFMI did not surpass any indices in surgical morbidity.

Conclusion: None of the indices reached the ideal AUC of 0.80 for any morbidity type, emphasizing the need for refinement. Updating these tools with contemporary data and exploring new prognostic factors is critical to improve morbidity risk stratification in metastatic bone disease.

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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
529
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was established in the fall of 1993 by the Academy in response to its membership’s demand for a clinical review journal. Two issues were published the first year, followed by six issues yearly from 1994 through 2004. In September 2005, JAAOS began publishing monthly issues. Each issue includes richly illustrated peer-reviewed articles focused on clinical diagnosis and management. Special features in each issue provide commentary on developments in pharmacotherapeutics, materials and techniques, and computer applications.
×
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