Tag: validation

Posted on

External validation of the Lawton brainstem cavernous malformation grading system in a cohort of 277 microsurgical patients

J Neurosurg 136:1231–1239, 2022

The brainstem cavernous malformation (BSCM) grading system predicts neurological outcomes associated with microsurgical resection and assists neurosurgeons in selecting patients for treatment. The predictive accuracy of the BSCM grading system should be validated in a large cohort from high-volume centers to generalize its use.

METHODS An external validation cohort comprised patients with a BSCM resected by the senior author (M.T.L.) since the publication of the BSCM grading system and those resected by another neurosurgeon (R.F.S.) over a 16-year period. Size, crossing the axial midpoint, the presence of a developmental venous anomaly, patient age, and timing of last hemorrhage were used to assign BSCM grades from 0 to VII. Poor neurological outcomes were recorded as modified Rankin Scale scores > 2 at last follow-up examination.

RESULTS A total of 277 patients were included in the study. The average BSCM grade was 3.9, and the majority of BSCMs (181 patients, 65%) were intermediate grade (grades III–V). Outcomes were predicted by BSCM grade, with good outcomes observed in 47 of 54 patients (87%) with low-grade BSCMs, in 135 of 181 patients (75%) with intermediate-grade BSCMs, and in 21 of 42 patients (50%) with high-grade BSCMs. Conversely, proportions of patients with neurological deterioration increased with increasing BSCM grade, with worsening observed in 2 of 54 patients (4%) with low-grade BSCMs, in 29 of 181 patients (16%) with intermediate-grade BSCMs, and in 17 of 42 patients (40%) with high-grade BSCMs. In the chi-square analysis, high-grade BSCMs were associated with increased odds of neurological worsening compared to low- and intermediate-grade BSCMs (OR 5.0, 95% CI 2.4–10.4; p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated acceptable discrimination for predicting unfavorable functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale score > 2) with an area under the curve of 0.74 (95% CI 0.68–0.80; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS This study validates the BSCM grading system in a large cohort of patients from two high-volume surgeons. BSCM grade predicted neurological outcomes with accuracy comparable to that of other grading systems in widespread use. The BSCM grading system establishes categories of low-, intermediate-, and high-grade BSCMs and a boundary or cutoff for surgery at BSCM grade V. BSCM grading guides the analysis of a particular patient’s condition, but treatment recommendations must be individualized, and neurosurgeons must calibrate BSCM grading to their own outcome results, unique abilities, and practices.

Posted on

Reliability assessment of a novel cervical spine deformity classification system

Cervical spine deformity classification

J Neurosurg Spine 23:673–683, 2015

Despite the complexity of cervical spine deformity (CSD) and its signifi cant impact on patient quality of life, there exists no comprehensive classification system. The objective of this study was to develop a novel classification system based on a modified Delphi approach and to characterize the intra- and interobserver reliability of this classification.

Methods: Based on an extensive literature review and a modified Delphi approach with an expert panel, a CSD classification system was generated. The classification system included a deformity descriptor and 5 modifiers that incorporated sagittal, regional, and global spinopelvic alignment and neurological status. The descriptors included: “C,” “CT,” and “T” for primary cervical kyphotic deformities with an apex in the cervical spine, cervicothoracic junction, or thoracic spine, respectively; “S” for primary coronal deformity with a coronal Cobb angle ≥ 15°; and “CVJ” for primary craniovertebral junction deformity. The modifiers included C2–7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), horizontal gaze (chin-brow to vertical angle [CBVA]), T1 slope (TS) minus C2–7 lordosis (TS-CL), myelopathy (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] scale score), and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab classification for thoracolumbar deformity. Application of the classification system requires the following: 1) full-length standing posteroanterior (PA) and lateral spine radiographs that include the cervical spine and femoral heads; 2) standing PA and lateral cervical spine radiographs; 3) completed and scored mJOA questionnaire; and 4) a clinical photograph or radiograph that includes the skull for measurement of the CBVA. A series of 10 CSD cases, broadly representative of the classification system, were selected and sufficient radiographic and clinical history to enable classification were assembled. A panel of spinal deformity surgeons was queried to classify each case twice, with a minimum of 1 intervening week. Inter- and intrarater reliability measures were based on calculations of Fleiss k coefficient values.

Results: Twenty spinal deformity surgeons participated in this study. Interrater reliability (Fleiss k coefficients) for the deformity descriptor rounds 1 and 2 were 0.489 and 0.280, respectively, and mean intrarater reliability was 0.584.

For the modifiers, including the SRS-Schwab components, the interrater (round 1/round 2) and intrarater reliabilities (Fleiss k coef cients) were: C2–7 SVA (0.338/0.412, 0.584), horizontal gaze (0.779/0.430, 0.768), TS-CL (0.721/0.567, 0.720), myelopathy (0.602/0.477, 0.746), SRS-Schwab curve type (0.590/0.433, 0.564), pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis (0.554/0.386, 0.826), pelvic tilt (0.714/0.627, 0.633), and C7–S1 SVA (0.071/0.064, 0.233), respectively. The parameter with the poorest reliability was the C7–S1 SVA, which may have resulted from differences in interpretation of positive and negative measurements.

Conclusions: The proposed classification provides a mechanism to assess CSD within the framework of global spinopelvic malalignment and clinically relevant parameters. The intra- and interobserver reliabilities suggest moderate agreement and serve as the basis for subsequent improvement and study of the proposed classification.

Proudly powered by WordPress