Background: The ability of frailty compared to age alone to predict adverse events in the surgical management of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) has not been defined in the literature. Methods: 41,369 patients with a diagnosis of DCM undergoing surgery were collected from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Database 2010–2018. Univariate analysis for each measure of frailty (modified frailty index 11- and 5-point; MFI-11, MFI-5), modified Charlson Co-morbidity index and ASA grade) were calculated for the following outcomes: mortality, major complication, unplanned reoperation, unplanned readmission, length of hospital stay, and discharge to a non-home destination. Multivariable modeling of age and frailty with a base model was performed to define the discriminative ability of each measure. Results: Age and frailty have a significant effect on all outcomes, but the MFI-5 has the largest effect size. Increasing frailty correlated significantly with the risk of perioperative adverse events, longer hospital stay, and risk of a non-home discharge destination. Multivariable modeling incorporating MFI-5 with age and the base model had a robust predictive value (0.85). MFI-5 had a high categorical assessment correlation with a MFI-11 of 0.988 (p < 0.001). Conclusions and Relevance: Measures of frailty have a greater effect size and a higher discriminative value to predict adverse events than age alone. MFI-5 categorical assessment is essentially equivalent to the MFI-11 score for DCM patients. A multivariable model using MFI-5 provides an accurate predictive tool that has important clinical applications.
The assessment, diagnosis, operative and nonoperative management of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) have evolved rapidly over the last 20 years. A clearer understanding of the pathobiology of DCM has led to attempts to develop objective measurements of the severity of myelopathy, including technology such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, biomarkers, and ancillary clinical testing. New pharmacological treatments have the potential to alter the course of surgical outcomes, and greater innovation in surgical techniques have made surgery safer, more effective and less invasive. Future developments for the treatment of DCM will seek to improve the diagnostic accuracy of imaging, improve the objectivity of clinical assessment, and increase the use of surgical technology to ensure the best outcome is achieved for each individual patient.
This systematic review aims to summarize the impact of nanotechnology and biomedical engineering in defining clinically meaningful predictive biomarkers in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), a critical worldwide health problem with an estimated 10 billion people affected annually worldwide. Data were collected through a review of the existing English literature performed on Scopus, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE, and/or Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Only experimental articles revolving around the management of TBI, in which the role of new devices based on innovative discoveries coming from the field of nanotechnology and biomedical engineering were highlighted, have been included and analyzed in this study. Based on theresults gathered from this research on innovative methods for genomics, epigenomics, and proteomics, their future application in this field seems promising. Despite the outstanding technical challenges of identifying reliable biosignatures for TBI and the mixed nature of studies herein described (single cells proteomics, biofilms, sensors, etc.), the clinical implementation of those discoveries will allow us to gain confidence in the use of advanced neuromonitoring modalities with a potential dramatic improvement in the management of those patients.
The field of neuro-oncology is rapidly progressing and internalizing many of the recent discoveries coming from research conducted in basic science laboratories worldwide. This systematic review aims to summarize the impact of nanotechnology and biomedical engineering in defining clinically meaningful predictive biomarkers with a potential application in the management of patients with brain tumors. Data were collected through a review of the existing English literature performed on Scopus, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE, and/or Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials: all available basic science and clinical papers relevant to address the above-stated research question were included and analyzed in this study. Based on the results of this systematic review we can conclude that: (1) the advances in nanotechnology and bioengineering are supporting tremendous efforts in optimizing the methods for genomic, epigenomic and proteomic profiling; (2) a successful translational approach is attempting to identify a growing number of biomarkers, some of which appear to be promising candidates in many areas of neuro-oncology; (3) the designing of Randomized Controlled Trials will be warranted to better define the prognostic value of those biomarkers and biosignatures.
Study Design. Prospective cross-sectional blinded-assessor cohort study.Objective. The aim of this study was to determine the interrater reliability of the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score in a large cohort of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) patients. Summary of Background Data. The mJOA score is widely accepted as the primary outcome measure in DCM; it has been utilized in clinical practice guidelines and directly influences treatment recommendations, but its reliability has not been established. Methods. A refined version of the mJOA was administered to DCM patients by two or more blinded clinicians. Inter-rater reliability was measured using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), agreement, and mean difference for mJOA total score and subscores. Data were also analyzed with analysis of variance for differences by mJOA severity (mild: 15-17, moderate: 12-14, severe: <12), assessor, assessment order, previous surgery, age, and sex. Results. One hundred fifty-four DCM patients underwent 322 mJOA assessments (183 paired assessments). ICC was 0.88 for total mJOA, 0.79 for upper extremity (UE) motor, 0.84 for lower extremity (LE) motor, 0.63 for UE sensation, and 0.78 for urinary function subscores. Paired assessments were identical across all four subscores in 25%. The mean difference in mJOA was 0.93 points between assessors, and this differed by severity (mild: 0.68, moderate: 1.24, severe: 0.87, P ¼ 0.001). Differences of ! 2 points occurred in 19%. Disagreement between mild and moderate severity occurred in 12% of patients. Other variables did not demonstrate significant relationships with mJOA scores. Conclusion. The inter-rater reliability of total mJOA and its subscores is good, except for UE sensory function (moderate). However, the vast majority of assessments differed between observers, indicating that this measure should be interpreted carefully, particularly when near the threshold between severity categories, or when a patient is reassessed for deterioration. Further efforts to educate clinicians on administration and to refine the UE sensory subscore may enhance the reliability of this tool.
ConClusionsIndependent risk factors for ihd and chf in css were identified. The risk stratification schema presented here may be helpful in developing a risk-based approach to preventive cardiovascular strategies for css.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.