Dataset Information

The Composite Severity Score for Lumbar Spine MRI: a Metric of Cumulative Degenerative Disease Predicts Time Spent on Interpretation and Reporting.

ABSTRACT: Conventional measures of radiologist efficiency, such as the relative value unit, fail to account for variations in the complexity and difficulty of a given study. For lumbar spine MRI (LMRI), an ideal performance metric should account for the global severity of lumbar degenerative disease (LSDD) which may influence reporting time (RT), thereby affecting clinical productivity. This study aims to derive a global LSDD metric and estimate its effect on RT. A 10-year archive of LMRI reports comprising 13,388 exams was reviewed. Objective reporting timestamps were used to calculate RT. A natural language processing (NLP) tool was used to extract radiologist-assigned stenosis severity using a 6-point scale (0 = "normal" to 5 = "severe") at each lumbar level. The composite severity score (CSS) was calculated as the sum of each of 18 stenosis grades. The predictive values of CSS, sex, age, radiologist identity, and referring service on RT were examined with multiple regression models. The NLP tool accurately classified LSDD in 94.8% of cases in a validation set. The CSS increased with patient age and differed between men and women. In a univariable model, CSS was a significant predictor of mean RT (R² = 0.38, p < 0.001) and independent predictor of mean RT (p < 0.001) controlling for patient sex, patient age, service location, and interpreting radiologist. The predictive strength of CSS was stronger for the low CSS range (CSS = 0-25, R² = 0.83, p < 0.001) compared to higher CSS values (CSS > 25, R² = 0.15, p = 0.05). Individual radiologist study volume was negatively correlated with mean RT (Pearson's R = - 0.35, p < 0.001). The composite severity score predicts radiologist reporting efficiency in LMRI, providing a quantitative measure of case complexity which may be useful for workflow planning and performance evaluation.

SUBMITTER: Caton MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8455764 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study designRetrospective database analysis.ObjectiveTo assess the effect glycemic control has on perioperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing elective degenerative lumbar spine surgery.Summary of background dataDiabetes mellitus (DM) is a prevalent disease of glucose dysregulation that has been demonstrated to increase morbidity and mortality after spine surgery. However, there is limited understanding of whether glycemic control influences surgical outcomes in patients with DM undergoing lumbar spine procedures for degenerative conditions.MethodsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample was analyzed from 2002 to 2011. Hospitalizations were isolated on the basis of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, procedural codes for lumbar spine surgery and diagnoses codes for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Patients were then classified into 3 cohorts: controlled diabetic, uncontrolled diabetic, and nondiabetic. Patient demographic data, acute complications, and hospitalization outcomes were determined for each cohort.ResultsA total of 403,629 (15.7%) controlled diabetic patients and 19,421 (0.75%) uncontrolled diabetic patients underwent degenerative lumbar spine surgery from 2002 to 2011. Relative to nondiabetic patients, uncontrolled diabetic patients had significantly increased odds of cardiac complications, deep venous thrombosis, and postoperative shock; in addition, uncontrolled diabetic patients also had an increased mean length of stay (approximately, 2.5 d), greater costs (1.3-fold), and a greater risk of inpatient mortality (odds ratio=2.6, 95% confidence interval=1.5-4.8, P<0.0009). Controlled diabetic patients also had increased risk of acute complications and inpatient mortality when compared with nondiabetic patients, but not nearly to the same magnitude as uncontrolled diabetic patients.ConclusionSuboptimal glycemic control in diabetic patients undergoing degenerative lumbar spine surgery leads to increased risk of acute complications and poor outcomes. Patients with uncontrolled DM, or poor glucose control, may benefit from improving glycemic control prior to surgery.Level of evidence3.

Project description:BackgroundFor diagnostic procedures to be clinically useful, they must be reliable. The interpretation of lumbar spine MRI scans is subject to variability and there is a lack of studies where reliability of multiple degenerative pathologies are rated simultaneously. The objective of our study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of three independent raters evaluating degenerative pathologies seen with lumbar spine MRI.MethodsFifty-nine people, 35 patients with low back pain (LBP) or LBP and leg pain and 24 people without LBP or leg pain, received an MRI of the lumbar spine. Three raters (one radiologist and two chiropractors) evaluated the MRIs for the presence and severity of eight degenerative spinal pathologies using a standardized format: Spondylolisthesis, scoliosis, annular fissure, disc degeneration, disc contour, nerve root compromise, spinal stenosis and facet joint degeneration. Findings were identified and classified at disc level according to type and severity. Raters were instructed to evaluate all study sample persons once to assess inter-rater reliability (fully crossed design). Reliability was calculated using Gwet's Agreement Coefficients (AC1 and AC2) and Cohen's Kappa (κ) and Conger's extension of Cohen's. Gwet's probabilistic benchmarking method to the Landis and Koch scale was used. MRI-findings achieving substantial reliability was considered acceptable.ResultsInter-rater reliability for all raters combined, ranged from (Gwet's AC1 or AC2): 0.64-0.99 and according to probabilistic benchmarking to the Landis and Koch scale equivalent to moderate to almost perfect reliability. Overall reliability level for individual pathologies was almost perfect reliability for spondylolisthesis, spinal stenosis, scoliosis and annular fissure, substantial for nerve root compromise and disc degeneration, and moderate for facet joint degeneration and disc contour.ConclusionInter-rater reliability for 3 raters, evaluating 177 disc levels, was found to be overall acceptable for 6 out of 8 degenerative MRI-findings in the lumbar spine. Ratings of facet joint degeneration and disc contour achieved moderate reliability and was considered unacceptable.

Project description:Study Design Randomized controlled trial. Objective Despite a large number of publications of outcomes after spinal fusion surgery, there is still no consensus on the efficacy of the several different fusion methods. The aim of this study was to determine whether transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) results in an improved clinical outcome compared with uninstrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) in the surgical treatment for chronic low back pain. Methods This study included 135 patients with degenerative disk disease (n = 96) or postdiskectomy syndrome (n = 39). Inclusion criteria were at least 1 year of back pain with or without leg pain in patients aged 20 to 65 with one- or two-level disease. Exclusion criteria were sequestration of disk hernia, psychosocial instability, isthmic spondylolisthesis, drug abuse, and previous spine surgery other than diskectomy. Pain was assessed by visual analog scale (pain index). Functional disability was quantified by the disability rating index and Oswestry Disability Index. The global outcome was assessed by the patient and classified as much better, better, unchanged, or worse. The patients were randomized to conventional uninstrumented PLF (n = 67) or TLIF (n = 68). PLF was performed in a standardized fashion using autograft. TLIF was performed with pedicle titanium screw fixation and a porous tantalum interbody spacer with interbody and posterolateral autograft. The clinical outcome measurements were obtained preoperatively and at 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The 2-year follow-up rate was 98%. Results The two treatment groups improved significantly from preoperatively to 2 years' follow-up. At final follow-up, the results in the TLIF group were significantly superior to those in the PLF group in pain index (2.0 versus 3.9, p = 0.007) and in disability rating index (22 versus 36, p = 0.003). The Oswestry Disability Index was better in the TLIF group (20 versus 28, p = 0.110, not significant). The global assessment was clearly superior in the TLIF group: 63% of patients scored "much better" in the TLIF group as compared with 48% in the PLF group (p = 0.017). Conclusions The results of the current study support the use of TLIF rather than uninstrumented PLF in the surgical treatment of the degenerative lumbar spine. The less optimal outcome after uninstrumented PLF may be explained by the much higher reoperation rate.

Dataset Information

The Composite Severity Score for Lumbar Spine MRI: a Metric of Cumulative Degenerative Disease Predicts Time Spent on Interpretation and Reporting.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets