Predictive value of seven preoperative prognostic scoring systems for spinal metastases

被引:247
|
作者
Leithner, Andreas [1 ]
Radl, Roman [1 ]
Gruber, Gerald [1 ]
Hochegger, Markus [1 ]
Leithner, Katharina [2 ]
Welkerling, Heike [3 ]
Rehak, Peter [4 ]
Windhager, Reinhard [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Graz, Univ Clin Orthopaed Surg, A-8036 Graz, Austria
[2] Med Univ Graz, Univ Clin Internal Med, Dept Pulmonol, A-8036 Graz, Austria
[3] Waldkrankenhaus St Marien, Erlangen, Germany
[4] Med Univ Graz, Univ Clin Surg, Div Biomed Engn & Comp, A-8036 Graz, Austria
关键词
Spine; Metastasis; Survival; Vertebral bodies; Cord compression;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-008-0763-1
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Predicting prognosis is the key factor in selecting the proper treatment modality for patients with spinal metastases. Therefore, various assessment systems have been designed in order to provide a basis for deciding the course of treatment. Such systems have been proposed by Tokuhashi, Sioutos, Tomita, Van der Linden, and Bauer. The scores differ greatly in the kind of parameters assessed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of each score. Eight parameters were assessed for 69 patients (37 male, 32 female): location, general condition, number of extraspinal bone metastases, number of spinal metastases, visceral metastases, primary tumour, severity of spinal cord palsy, and pathological fracture. Scores according to Tokuhashi (original and revised), Sioutos, Tomita, Van der Linden, and Bauer were assessed as well as a modified Bauer score without scoring for pathologic fracture. Nineteen patients were still alive as of September 2006 with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. All other patients died after a mean period of 17 months after operation. The mean overall survival period was only 3 months for lung cancer, followed by prostate (7 months), kidney (23 months), breast (35 months), and multiple myeloma (51 months). At univariate survival analysis, primary tumour and visceral metastases were significant parameters, while Karnofsky score was only significant in the group including myeloma patients. In multivariate analysis of all seven parameters assessed, primary tumour and visceral metastases were the only significant parameters. Of all seven scoring systems, the original Bauer score and a Bauer score without scoring for pathologic fracture had the best association with survival (P < 0.001). The data of the present study emphasize that the original Bauer score and a modified Bauer score without scoring for pathologic fracture seem to be practicable and highly predictive preoperative scoring systems for patients with spinal metastases. However, decision for or against surgery should never be based alone on a prognostic score but should take symptoms like pain or neurological compromise into account.
引用
收藏
页码:1488 / 1495
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Prognostic Value of Preoperative Inflammatory Markers in Melanoma Patients with Brain Metastases
    Schneider, Matthias
    Schaefer, Niklas
    Bode, Christian
    Borger, Valeri
    Eichhorn, Lars
    Giordano, Frank A.
    Gueresir, Erdem
    Heimann, Muriel
    Ko, Yon-Dschun
    Lehmann, Felix
    Potthoff, Anna-Laura
    Radbruch, Alexander
    Schaub, Christina
    Schwab, Katjana S.
    Weller, Johannes
    Vatter, Hartmut
    Herrlinger, Ulrich
    Landsberg, Jennifer
    Schuss, Patrick
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (04) : 1 - 10
  • [22] Prognostic value of preoperative immune-nutritional scoring systems in remnant gastric cancer patients undergoing surgery
    Zhang, Yan
    Wang, Lin-Jun
    Li, Qin-Ya
    Yuan, Zhen
    Zhang, Dian-Cai
    Xu, Hao
    Yang, Li
    Gu, Xin-Hua
    Xu, Ze-Kuan
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2023, 15 (02): : 211 - 221
  • [23] Evaluation of different scoring systems for spinal metastases based on a Chinese cohort
    Li, Zhehuang
    Guo, Liangyu
    Guo, Bairu
    Zhang, Peng
    Wang, Jiaqiang
    Wang, Xin
    Yao, Weitao
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2023, 12 (04): : 4125 - 4136
  • [24] Which Prognostic Model Best Predicts Poor Prognosis in Patients with Spinal Metastases? A Comparative Analysis of 8 Scoring Systems
    Park, Se-Jun
    Park, Jin-Sung
    Kang, Dong-Ho
    Lee, Chong-Suh
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2025, 193 : 553 - 566
  • [25] Predictive and Prognostic Value of Preoperative Symptoms in the Surgical Treatment of Pulmonary Aspergilloma
    Sagan, Dariusz
    Gozdziuk, Kazimierz
    Korobowicz, Elzbieta
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2010, 163 (02) : E35 - E43
  • [26] Predictive and Prognostic Value of Preoperative Thrombocytosis in Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma
    Foerster, Beat
    Moschini, Marco
    Abufaraj, Mohammad
    Soria, Francesco
    Gust, Kilian M.
    Roupret, Morgan
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Briganti, Alberto
    Rink, Michael
    Kluth, Luis
    Mathieu, Romain
    Margulis, Vitaly
    Lotan, Yair
    Aziz, Atiqullah
    John, Hubert
    Shariat, Shahrokh F.
    CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER, 2017, 15 (06) : E1039 - E1045
  • [27] Predictive and prognostic value of preoperative complete blood count in prostate cancer
    Kokenek-Unal, Tuba Dilay
    Findik, Siddika
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND ANALYTICAL MEDICINE, 2018, 9 (06) : 543 - 547
  • [28] Comparing the Accuracy of Seven Scoring Systems in Predicting Survival of Lung Cancer Patients With Spinal Metastases An External Validation From Two Centers
    Yan, Yuan
    Zhong, Guoqing
    Lai, Huahao
    Huang, Chongquan
    Yao, Mengyu
    Zhou, Maolin
    Zhou, Chengzhi
    Wang, Jing
    Cheng, Shi
    Zhang, Yu
    SPINE, 2023, 48 (14) : 1009 - 1016
  • [29] Are prognostic scoring systems of value in patients with follicular thyroid carcinoma?
    Rios, A.
    Rodriguez, J. M.
    Ferri, B.
    Matinez-Barba, E.
    Febrero, B.
    Parrilla, P.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2013, 169 (06) : 821 - 827
  • [30] Value of preoperative stone scoring systems in predicting the results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy
    Kumsar, Sukru
    Aydemir, Huseyin
    Halis, Fikret
    Kose, Osman
    Gokce, Ahmet
    Adsan, Oztug
    CENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (03) : 353 - 357