Prediction of bowel management independence after ischemic spinal cord injury

Chiara Pavese, Giorgio Scivoletto, Mariangela V Puci, Rainer Abel, Armin Curt, Doris Maier, Rüdiger Rupp, Martin Schubert, Norbert Weidner, Cristina Montomoli, Thomas M Kessler, Chiara Pavese, Giorgio Scivoletto, Mariangela V Puci, Rainer Abel, Armin Curt, Doris Maier, Rüdiger Rupp, Martin Schubert, Norbert Weidner, Cristina Montomoli, Thomas M Kessler

Abstract

Background: Ischemic spinal cord injury (SCI) belongs to the heterogeneous group of non-traumatic SCI, while the course of sensorimotor and functional recovery is comparable to traumatic SCI. Recently, we derived from data of patients with traumatic SCI a valid model to predict an independent and reliable bowel management one year after SCI.

Aim: To evaluate the performance of this model to predict an independent and reliable bowel management one year following ischemic SCI.

Design: Prognostic study - observational study.

Setting: European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01571531.

Population: One hundred and forty-two patients with ischemic SCI of various level and severity of injury.

Methods: The prediction model relied on a single predictor collected within 40 days from injury, the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury total motor score. Bowel outcome one year after SCI derived from the dichotomization of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) item 7 scores. We defined a positive outcome as independent bowel management with regular movements and appropriate timing with no or rare accidents (score of 10 in SCIM version II and score of 8 or 10 in version III).

Results: The model showed a fair discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.780 (95% confidence interval=0.702-0.860). In addition, the model displayed an acceptable accuracy and calibration.

Conclusions: The study extends the validity of our rule to patients with ischemic SCI, thus providing the first model to predict an independent and reliable bowel management in this population.

Clinical rehabilitation impact: The model may be employed in clinical practice to counsel patients, to define the rehabilitation aims and to estimate the need of assistance after discharge, as well as in the research field for the optimization of patients' allocation in the design of future clinical trials.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest.—The authors certify that there is no conflict of interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed in the manuscript.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
—A) Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for prediction of independent bowel management 1 year after ischemic SCI based on Mtot within 40 days. The ROC Y-axis indicates the sensitivity (or the true-positive rate; ie, the proportion of positive cases that are correctly identified by the test) and X-axis indicates the false-positive rate (i.e., the proportion of negative cases that are wrongly classified as positive by the test). B) Calibration plot of the model: comparison between observed and predicted probability to reach an independent bowel management 1 year after ischemic SCI. The red spike plot at the bottom gives the distribution of subjects with (1) and without (0) the outcome (independent bowel management one year after SCI). SCI: spinal cord injury, Mtot: ISNCSCI total motor score.

References

    1. New PW, Cripps RA, Bonne Lee B. Global maps of non-traumatic spinal cord injury epidemiology: towards a living data repository. Spinal Cord 2014;52:97–109. 10.1038/sc.2012.165
    1. Sturt R, Hill B, Holland A, New PW, Bevans C. Validation of a clinical prediction rule for ambulation outcome after non-traumatic spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2020;58:609–15. 10.1038/s41393-019-0386-x
    1. Kirshblum SC, Priebe MM, Ho CH, Scelza WM, Chiodo AE, Wuermser LA. Spinal cord injury medicine. 3. Rehabilitation phase after acute spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88(Suppl 1):S62–70. 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.12.003
    1. Scivoletto G, Torre M, Mammone A, Maier DD, Weidner N, Schubert M, et al. Acute Traumatic and Ischemic Spinal Cord Injuries Have a Comparable Course of Recovery. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2020;34:723–32. 10.1177/1545968320939569
    1. Pavese C, Schneider MP, Schubert M, Curt A, Scivoletto G, Finazzi-Agrò E, et al. Prediction of bladder outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury: a longitudinal cohort study. PLoS Med 2016;13:e1002041. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002041
    1. Scivoletto G, Pavese C, Bachmann LM, Schubert M, Curt A, Finazzi Agro E, et al. Prediction of bladder outcomes after ischemic spinal cord injury: A longitudinal cohort study from the European multicenter study about spinal cord injury. Neurourol Urodyn 2018;37:1779–84. 10.1002/nau.23521
    1. Pavese C, Bachmann LM, Schubert M, Curt A, Mehnert U, Schneider MP, et al. Bowel Outcome Prediction After Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: Longitudinal Cohort Study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2019;33:902–10. 10.1177/1545968319868722
    1. Pavese C, Scivoletto G, Puci MV, Schubert M, Curt A, Finazzi Agrò E, et al. External validation confirms validity of a simple model to predict bowel outcome after traumatic spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2021;35:659–62. 10.1177/15459683211023191
    1. ASIA and ISCoS International Standards Committee . The 2019 revision of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI)-What’s new? Spinal Cord 2019;57:815–7. 10.1038/s41393-019-0350-9
    1. Lena E, Baroncini I, Pavese C, Musumeci G, Volini S, Masciullo M, et al. Reliability and validity of the international standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury in patients with non-traumatic spinal cord lesions. Spinal Cord 2022;60:30–6. 10.1038/s41393-021-00675-9
    1. Catz A, Itzkovich M, Steinberg F, Philo O, Ring H, Ronen J, et al. The Catz-Itzkovich SCIM: a revised version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure. Disabil Rehabil 2001;23:263–8. 10.1080/096382801750110919
    1. Catz A, Itzkovich M, Tesio L, Biering-Sorensen F, Weeks C, Laramee MT, et al. A multicenter international study on the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, version III: rasch psychometric validation. Spinal Cord 2007;45:275–91. 10.1038/sj.sc.3101960
    1. Dankers FJ, Traverso A, Wee L, van Kuijk SM. Prediction Modeling Methodology. In Kubben P, Dumontier M, Dekker A. Fundamentals of Clinical Data Science. Cham: Springer Open; 2018. p. 111-3.
    1. Roelen CA, Bültmann U, van Rhenen W, van der Klink JJ, Twisk JW, Heymans MW. External validation of two prediction models identifying employees at risk of high sickness absence: cohort study with 1-year follow-up. BMC Public Health 2013;13:105. 10.1186/1471-2458-13-105
    1. Steyerberg EW, Vickers AJ, Cook NR, Gerds T, Gonen M, Obuchowski N, et al. Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology 2010;21:128–38. 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c30fb2
    1. Lindhiem O, Petersen IT, Mentch LK, Youngstrom EA. The Importance of Calibration in Clinical Psychology. Assessment 2020;27:840–54. 10.1177/1073191117752055
    1. Khan O, Badhiwala JH, Fehlings MG. Prediction of independence in bowel function after spinal cord injury: validation of a logistic regression model. Spinal Cord 2021;59:207–14. 10.1038/s41393-020-00551-y
    1. Pigna F, Lana S, Bellini C, Bonfanti L, Creta M, Cervellin G. Spinal cord infarction. A case report and narrative review. Acta Biomed 2021;92(S1):e2021080.
    1. Pouw MH, Hosman AJ, van Kampen A, Hirschfeld S, Thietje R, van de Meent H. Is the outcome in acute spinal cord ischaemia different from that in traumatic spinal cord injury? A cross-sectional analysis of the neurological and functional outcome in a cohort of 93 paraplegics. Spinal Cord 2011;49:307–12. 10.1038/sc.2010.114
    1. Scivoletto G, Laurenza L, Mammone A, Foti C, Molinari M. Recovery following ischemic myelopathies and traumatic spinal cord lesions. Spinal Cord 2011;49:897–902. 10.1038/sc.2011.31
    1. Bonavita J, Torre M, Capirossi R, Baroncini I, Brunelli E, Chiarottini G, et al. Outcomes Following Ischemic Myelopathies and Traumatic Spinal Injury. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2017;23:368–76. 10.1310/sci2304-368
    1. Hupp M, Pavese C, Bachmann LM, Koller R, Schubert M, EMSCI Study Group . Electrophysiological multimodal assessments improve outcome prediction in traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. J Neurotrauma 2018;35:2916–23. 10.1089/neu.2017.5576
    1. Alexander MS, Anderson KD, Biering-Sorensen F, Blight AR, Brannon R, Bryce TN, et al. Outcome measures in spinal cord injury: recent assessments and recommendations for future directions. Spinal Cord 2009;47:582–91. 10.1038/sc.2009.18
    1. Anderson KD. Targeting recovery: priorities of the spinal cord-injured population. J Neurotrauma 2004;21:1371–83. 10.1089/neu.2004.21.1371
    1. Simpson LA, Eng JJ, Hsieh JT, Wolfe DL, Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Evidence Scire Research Team . The health and life priorities of individuals with spinal cord injury: a systematic review. J Neurotrauma 2012;29:1548–55. 10.1089/neu.2011.2226
    1. Coggrave M, Norton C, Cody JD. Management of faecal incontinence and constipation in adults with central neurological diseases. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;(1):CD002115. 10.1002/14651858.CD002115.pub5
    1. Musco S, Bazzocchi G, Martellucci J, Amato MP, Manassero A, Putignano D, et al. Treatments in neurogenic bowel dysfunctions: evidence reviews and clinical recommendations in adults. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2020;56:741–55. 10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06412-6

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir