title: Predictive value of seven preoperative prognostic scoring systems for spinal metastases.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: University Clinic of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. andreas.leithner@aon.at
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Leithner
authors.forename: Roman
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Radl
authors.forename: Gerald
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Gruber
authors.forename: Markus
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Hochegger
authors.forename: Katharina
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Leithner
authors.forename: Heike
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Welkerling
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Rehak
authors.forename: Reinhard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Windhager
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D018450:Disease Progression; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008017:Life Expectancy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009362:Neoplasm Metastasis / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology*; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D019635:Neurosurgical Procedures / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011300:Preoperative Care / Q000379:methods*; D011379:Prognosis; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013125:Spinal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000556:secondary* / Q000601:surgery; D013131:Spine / Q000473:pathology* / Q000601:surgery*; D016019:Survival Analysis; D015996:Survival Rate; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014781:Viscera / Q000473:pathology
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1990 Nov;15(11):1110-3
references.pmid: 1702559
references.citation: Eur Spine J. 2006 Feb;15(2):196-202
references.pmid: 15744540
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Nov 15;31(24):2849-56
references.pmid: 17108840
references.citation: Acta Orthop Scand. 1995 Apr;66(2):143-6
references.pmid: 7740944
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991 Mar;16(3):265-71
references.pmid: 1709305
references.citation: Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Oct;(415 Suppl):S165-75
references.pmid: 14600607
references.citation: Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 Sep;33(7):914-9
references.pmid: 17210240
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Oct 1;30(19):2186-91
references.pmid: 16205345
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003 Sep;85(7):1045-50
references.pmid: 14516044
references.citation: Acta Oncol. 2007;46(5):592-601
references.pmid: 17562435
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 May 15;27(10):1124-6
references.pmid: 12004183
references.citation: Cancer. 2005 Jan 15;103(2):320-8
references.pmid: 15593360
references.citation: Paraplegia. 1969 Nov;7(3):179-92
references.pmid: 5360915
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Mar 1;28(5):508-12
references.pmid: 12616166
references.citation: Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Feb;14(2):998-1004
references.pmid: 17083006
references.citation: Cancer. 1995 Oct 15;76(8):1453-9
references.pmid: 8620423
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Oct 1;30(19):2222-6
references.pmid: 16205351
references.citation: Eur Spine J. 2007 Oct;16(10):1659-67
references.pmid: 17486376
references.citation: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Feb 1;26(3):298-306
references.pmid: 11224867
references.citation: Cancer. 2003 Jan 15;97(2):476-84
references.pmid: 12518372