Background: Frailty and sarcopenia predict worse surgical outcomes among spinal degenerative and deformity-related populations; this association is less clear in the context of spinal oncology. Here, we identified frailty and sarcopenia tools applied in spinal oncology and appraised their clinimetric properties. Methods: A systematic review was conducted from January 1 st , 2000, until June 2022. Study characteristics, frailty tools, measures of sarcopenia, component domains, individual items, cut-off values, and measurement techniques were collected. Clinimetric assessment was performed according to Consensus-based Standards for Health Measurement Instruments. Results: Twenty-two studies were included (42,514 patients). The three most employed frailty tools were the Metastatic Spine tumor Frailty Index (MSTFI), Modified Frailty Index-11 (mFI-11), and the mFI-5. The three most common sarcopenia measures were the L3-Total Psoas Area (TPA)/Vertebral Body Area (VBA), L3-TPA/Height 2 , and L3-Spinal Muscle Index (L3-Cross-Sectional Muscle Area/Height 2 ). Frailty and sarcopenia measures lacked content and construct validity. Positive predictive validity was observed in select studies employing the HFRS, mFI-5, MSTFI, and L3-TPA/VBA. All frailty tools had floor or ceiling effects. Conclusions: Existing tools for evaluating frailty and sarcopenia in surgical spine oncology have poor clinimetric properties. Here, we provide a pragmatic approach to utilizing existing frailty and sarcopenia tools, until more clinimetrically robust instruments are developed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
MacLean et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: