Mirels' rating for humerus lesions is both reproducible and valid

被引:36
作者
Evans, Andrew R. [2 ]
Bottros, John [3 ]
Grant, William [2 ]
Chen, Benjamin Y. [2 ]
Damron, Timothy A. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Musculoskeletal Sci Res Ctr, Inst Human Performance, Syracuse, NY 13210 USA
[2] SUNY Upstate Med Univ, Syracuse, NY USA
[3] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s11999-008-0200-0
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Mirels' rating system is commonly used to predict risk of fracture in patients with metastatic bone lesions to long bones, but it has not been independently validated for use in humeral bone lesions. We asked whether this system was a valid and reproducible instrument for predicting impending pathologic fractures in the humerus. We presented 17 case histories and plain radiographs of 16 patients with humeral metastases through a web-based survey to 39 physicians with varying training and experience. Participants scored each case using Mirels' criteria and provided a fracture prediction, which was compared with actual outcome in the subset of 12 patients with three fractures not treated prophylactically. Using Mirels' definition of impending pathologic fracture (nine points or greater), the sensitivity and specificity for determining the likelihood of pathologic humeral fracture were 14.5% and 82.9%, respectively. When we used seven or more points as the definition of impending pathologic humeral fracture, sensitivity improved to 81% but specificity was reduced to 32%. Kappa analysis suggested moderate reproducibility across groups for prediction of pathologic fracture. The Mirels rating system for humeral lesions is reproducible and valid, but low specificity at acceptable sensitivity levels as reported remains a problem as for femoral lesions. Level of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
引用
收藏
页码:1279 / 1284
页数:6
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]
Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies [J].
Coleman, RE .
CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS, 2001, 27 (03) :165-176
[2]
Critical evaluation of Mirels' rating system for impending pathologic fractures [J].
Damron, TA ;
Morgan, H ;
Prakash, D ;
Grant, W ;
Aronowitz, J ;
Heiner, J .
CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2003, (415) :S201-S207
[3]
PROPHYLACTIC INTERNAL FIXATION OF SECONDARY NEOPLASTIC DEPOSITS IN LONG BONES [J].
FIDLER, M .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1973, 1 (3849) :341-343
[4]
FLEMMING JE, 1986, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P258
[5]
GREEN A, 1997, P 22 ANN SAS US GROU
[6]
Harrington KD, 1986, AAOS INSTR COURSE LE, V18, P357
[7]
HIPP JA, 1995, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P120
[8]
LANDIS JR, 1977, BIOMETRICS, V33, P174
[9]
MIRELS H, 1989, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P256
[10]
SURGICAL TREATMENT FOR SECONDARY NEOPLASTIC FRACTURES - A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY OF 96 PATIENTS [J].
PARRISH, FF ;
MURRAY, JA .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1970, A 52 (04) :665-&