ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Discrepancy between X-ray and CT assessment in the Mirels score for long bone metastasis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Mirels score is used widely to predict pathological fractures in long bone metastases. Four factors are used in this scoring system, assessed based on patient complaints and radiographic images: pain, (anatomical) site, size, and lesion (radiographic appearance). However, in recent clinical practice, orthopaedic surgeons are required to evaluate the fracture risk of long bone metastases solely using CT images. The consistency of the Mirels scores between X-ray and CT assessments is understudied. This study aimed to examine the agreement between radiographic and CT assessments for three factors (site, size, and lesion).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the Mireles scores of long bone metastases with radiographic and CT images taken during the same period between 2013 and 2024. Anatomical site, size, and radiographic appearance were independently evaluated through a blinded test by three observers (an orthopaedic oncologist, a board-certified general orthopaedic surgeon, and an orthopaedic senior resident). The kappa coefficient of agreement was evaluated using the Landis criterion.
resultsFifty-two cases (22 females and 30 males) with a mean age of 67 years (range 48–86) were analyzed, including 39 femurs, seven tibias, and six humeri. Kappa values for the intra-observer variability of the Mirels score between X-ray and CT were moderate to good(0.41–0.67)for lesion but poor to fair (0.17–0.34) for size. CT assessments tended to underestimate the size compared with X-rays across all observers; the average size score was 2.35 (SD 0.78) for X-ray versus 2.02 (SD 0.87) for CT (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsThe Mirels score assessments were consistent between X-ray and CT for lesion but not for size, and CT tended to underestimate the size compared to X-ray assessment. Therefore, clinicians should be cautious of using only CT-based axial measurements in predicting the risk of fracture.
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.