Key result
SpineSage matches ACS-NSQIP for overall complications but better predicts major events in spine patients >80.
Why the study?
The predictive accuracy of the SpineSage and ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculators needed validation in patients aged over 80 years undergoing spine surgery.
Does the SpineSage surgical risk calculator improve predictive accuracy for complications compared to the ACS-NSQIP calculator in patients over 80 years undergoing spine surgery?
Cohort (n=210)
No
Does the SpineSage surgical risk calculator improve predictive accuracy for complications compared to the ACS-NSQIP calculator in patients over 80 years undergoing spine surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.688% vs 0.634%
p-value: p=<.001 vs .021
In patients over 80 undergoing spine surgery, the SpineSage risk calculator demonstrated superior accuracy in predicting major medical complications compared to the ACS-NSQIP calculator.
May aid major complication risk assessment in elderly spine surgery; hypothesis-generating pending prospective validation.
Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To validate the predictive accuracy of both the SpineSage and ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculators in patients over the age of 80 years, undergoing spine surgery for any reason. Methods We included 210 consecutive patients treated with single-stage spine surgery at our institution between 2009 and 2019. The demographic details and preoperative characteristics of each patient were collected and reviewed for entry into both the SpineSage and ACS risk calculators. The estimated risk supplied by these calculators was compared to the observed rate of complications post-surgery. The main method of comparison was using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results Complications were identified in 51 patients (24%). Most patients underwent surgery for a degenerative cause (71%), with the majority of procedures performed on the lumbosacral spine (66%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to compare the outcomes of each tool. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis showed similar predictive accuracy between SpineSage and ACS when predicting overall complications (0.688; P < .001 vs 0.634; P = .021). AUC analysis demonstrated that SpineSage had better predictive accuracy when estimating risk of major complications (0.778; P = .037 vs 0.675; P = .001). Conclusion For the prediction of risks associated with spine surgery in those aged >80 years, SpineSage appears to be preferable to the ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator in this single centre cohort, SpineSage was more accurate in predicting the risk of serious medical complications. The accuracy of both of these tools could still be improved upon.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Willoughby et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Spine surgery (n=210). SpineSage surgical risk calculator vs. ACS-NSQIP surgical risk calculator was evaluated on Predictive accuracy for overall complications (AUC) (p=<.001 vs .021). In patients >80 years undergoing spine surgery, SpineSage had similar accuracy to ACS-NSQIP for overall complications (AUC 0.688 vs 0.634) but better predictive accuracy for major complications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: