Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques
One of the key roles of an orthopedic surgeon treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) is fracture risk prediction. Current widely used impending fracture risk tools such as Mirels scoring lack specificity. Two newer methods of fracture risk prediction, CT-based structural rigidity analysis (CTRA) and...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Advances in Orthopedics |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/5591715 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832546277600002048 |
|---|---|
| author | Shannon M. Kaupp Kenneth A. Mann Mark A. Miller Timothy A. Damron |
| author_facet | Shannon M. Kaupp Kenneth A. Mann Mark A. Miller Timothy A. Damron |
| author_sort | Shannon M. Kaupp |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | One of the key roles of an orthopedic surgeon treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) is fracture risk prediction. Current widely used impending fracture risk tools such as Mirels scoring lack specificity. Two newer methods of fracture risk prediction, CT-based structural rigidity analysis (CTRA) and finite element analysis (FEA), have each been shown to be more accurate than Mirels. This case series illustrates comparative Mirels, CTRA, and FEA for 8 femurs in 7 subjects. These cases were selected from a much larger data set to portray examples of true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives as defined by CTRA relative to the fracture outcome. Case illustrations demonstrate comparative Mirels and FEA. This series illustrates the use, efficacy, and limitations of these tools. As all current tools have limitations, further work is needed in refining and developing fracture risk prediction. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-8797a0b772834db7a7645a567ffc75f6 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-3464 2090-3472 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Advances in Orthopedics |
| spelling | doaj-art-8797a0b772834db7a7645a567ffc75f62025-02-03T07:23:29ZengWileyAdvances in Orthopedics2090-34642090-34722021-01-01202110.1155/2021/55917155591715Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different TechniquesShannon M. Kaupp0Kenneth A. Mann1Mark A. Miller2Timothy A. Damron3SUNY Upstate Medical University, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USASUNY Upstate Medical University, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USASUNY Upstate Medical University, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USASUNY Upstate Medical University, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USAOne of the key roles of an orthopedic surgeon treating metastatic bone disease (MBD) is fracture risk prediction. Current widely used impending fracture risk tools such as Mirels scoring lack specificity. Two newer methods of fracture risk prediction, CT-based structural rigidity analysis (CTRA) and finite element analysis (FEA), have each been shown to be more accurate than Mirels. This case series illustrates comparative Mirels, CTRA, and FEA for 8 femurs in 7 subjects. These cases were selected from a much larger data set to portray examples of true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives as defined by CTRA relative to the fracture outcome. Case illustrations demonstrate comparative Mirels and FEA. This series illustrates the use, efficacy, and limitations of these tools. As all current tools have limitations, further work is needed in refining and developing fracture risk prediction.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/5591715 |
| spellingShingle | Shannon M. Kaupp Kenneth A. Mann Mark A. Miller Timothy A. Damron Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques Advances in Orthopedics |
| title | Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques |
| title_full | Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques |
| title_fullStr | Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques |
| title_full_unstemmed | Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques |
| title_short | Predicting Fracture Risk in Patients with Metastatic Bone Disease of the Femur: A Pictorial Review Using Three Different Techniques |
| title_sort | predicting fracture risk in patients with metastatic bone disease of the femur a pictorial review using three different techniques |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/5591715 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shannonmkaupp predictingfractureriskinpatientswithmetastaticbonediseaseofthefemurapictorialreviewusingthreedifferenttechniques AT kennethamann predictingfractureriskinpatientswithmetastaticbonediseaseofthefemurapictorialreviewusingthreedifferenttechniques AT markamiller predictingfractureriskinpatientswithmetastaticbonediseaseofthefemurapictorialreviewusingthreedifferenttechniques AT timothyadamron predictingfractureriskinpatientswithmetastaticbonediseaseofthefemurapictorialreviewusingthreedifferenttechniques |