ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2024
Construction and clinical validation of risk model for predicting bone cement leakage after the surgical management of spinal metastases.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complications of vertebral augmentation in metastatic spinal fractures: a systematic review of multiple study designs.Journal of bone oncology · 2026Review
- A mechanobiological hypothesis on bone cement-induced progression of bone metastases.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to comprehensively analyze the risk factors associated with bone cement leakage (LCK) during the surgical management of spinal metastases, construct a joint risk model for predictive assessment, and validate the clinical applicability of the risk model in an independent patient cohort. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent surgery for spinal metastases between February 2022 and June 2023. Patients were divided into a non-LCK group (n=134) and an LCK group (n=86) based on the presence or absence of bone cement leakage after surgery. Additionally, a validation group was established, consisting of 21 patients with LCK and 65 patients without. Analysis focused on patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, LCK location, complications, pain management, and improvements in activities of daily living (ADL). Logistic regression, calibration curve, clinical impact curve (CIC) analysis, decision curve analysis (DCA) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were used to assess the risk factors and construct a joint risk model. There were significant differences between the two groups in pathologic fracture, Tomita classification, posterior wall destruction, injected laterality, injected bone cement volume, radicular pain, pulmonary embolism, and medullary compression. Pathologic fracture, radicular pain, pulmonary embolism, and medullary compression were positively correlated with the occurrence of LCK, while Tomita classification, posterior wall destruction, injection laterality, and injected bone cement volume were negatively correlated with the occurrence of LCK. Pathological fracture, Tomita classification, posterior wall destruction, injected laterality, injected bone cement volume, and specific postoperative complications were identified as significant risk factors associated with LCK. The constructed joint risk model, incorporating these risk factors, demonstrated substantial predictive value, with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.885. Clinical validation in an independent patient cohort further confirmed the predictive power of the joint risk model, with an AUC of 0.846. This study underscores the multifactorial nature of LCK in surgical management of spinal metastases, providing valuable insights for risk assessment and management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.