An Appraisal of the Quality of Development and Reporting of Predictive Models in Neurosurgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Significant evidence has indicated that the reporting quality of novel predictive models is poor because of confounding by small data sets, inappropriate statistical analyses, and a lack of validation and reproducibility. The Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement was developed to increase the generalizability of predictive models. This study evaluated the quality of predictive models reported in neurosurgical literature through their compliance with the TRIPOD guidelines. METHODS: Articles reporting prediction models published in the top 5 neurosurgery journals by SCImago Journal Rank-2 (Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, and Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry) between January 1st, 2018, and January 1st, 2023, were identified through a PubMed search strategy that combined terms related to machine learning and prediction modeling. These original research articles were analyzed against the TRIPOD criteria. RESULTS: A total of 110 articles were assessed with the TRIPOD checklist. The median compliance was 57.4% (IQR: 50.0%-66.7%). Models using machine learning-based models exhibited lower compliance on average compared with conventional learning-based models (57.1%, 50.0%-66.7% vs 68.1%, 50.2%-68.1%, P = .472). Among the TRIPOD criteria, the lowest compliance was observed in blinding the assessment of predictors and outcomes (n = 7, 12.7% and n = 10, 16.9%, respectively), including an informative title (n = 17, 15.6%) and reporting model performance measures such as confidence intervals (n = 27, 24.8%). Few studies provided sufficient information to allow for the external validation of results (n = 26, 25.7%). CONCLUSION: Published predictive models in neurosurgery commonly fall short of meeting the established guidelines laid out by TRIPOD for optimal development, validation, and reporting. This lack of compliance may represent the minor extent to which these models have been subjected to external validation or adopted into routine clinical practice in neurosurgery.

The Limited Utility of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score as a Frailty Assessment Tool in Neurosurgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) is an International Classification of Disease 10th Revision-based scale that was originally designed for, and validated in, the assessment of patients 75 years or older presenting in an acute care setting. This study highlights central tenets inherent to the concept of frailty; questions the logic behind, and utility of, HFRS' recent implementation in the neurosurgical literature; and discusses why there is no useful role for HFRS as a frailty-based neurosurgical risk assessment (FBNRA) tool. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic review of the literature per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, including all cranial and spinal studies that used HFRS as their primary frailty tool. Seventeen (N = 17) studies used HFRS to assess frailty's impact on neurosurgical outcomes. Thirteen total journals, 10 of which were neurosurgical journals, including the highest impact factor journals, published the 17 papers. RESULTS: Increasing HFRS score was associated with adverse outcomes, including prolonged length of stay (11 of 17 studies), nonroutine discharge (10 of 17 studies), and increased hospital costs (9 of 17 studies). Four different HFRS studies, of the 17, predicted one of the following 4 adverse outcomes: worse quality of life, worse functional outcomes, reoperation, or in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: Despite its rapid acceptance and widespread proliferation through the leading neurosurgical journals, HFRS lacks any conceptual relationship to the frailty syndrome or FBNRA for individual patients. HFRS measures acute conditions using International Classification of Disease 10th Revision codes and awards "frailty" points for symptoms and examination findings unrelated to the impaired baseline physiological reserve inherent to the very definition of frailty. HFRS lacks clinical utility as it cannot be deployed point-of-care at the bedside to risk stratify patients. HFRS has never been validated in any patient population younger than 75 years or in any nonacute care setting. We recommend HFRS be discontinued as an individual FBNRA tool.

Initial Experience with the Contour Device in the Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Wide-necked Bifurcation Aneurysms: A Single-operator, Multicenter Study.

Background: Intrasaccular flow diverters are a new modality in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. The Contour device has been designed to offer a variety of advantages over existing endovascular treatment options for wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms. There is no available literature describing its use in treating ruptured aneurysms. Objective: To assess the safety, outcome, and efficacy of the Contour device as a primary modality in treating ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Materials And Methods: A retrospective analysis of 14 aneurysms in 13 patients treated with the Contour device was studied. Data pertaining to demographics, clinical presentation on arrival, aneurysmal characteristics, and follow-up outcome was collected. The Hunt-Hess scale and modified Rankin scale were used to grade severity of clinical presentation. Results: Of the 14 aneurysms treated, one was unruptured and 13 were ruptured. Six middle cerebral artery aneurysms, six anterior communicating artery, one basilar top and one distal anterior cerebral artery aneurysm were treated. Coiling was required in two patients due to the large size of their aneurysms. No thromboembolic complications or intraoperative rupture was reported following device placement. Two patients required antiplatelet therapy for 6 weeks. A median follow-up at 3 months revealed stable placement of the device within the aneurysm and no sign of residual aneurysm or rebleed. Conclusion: Initial experience with Contour in treating ruptured aneurysms has shown favorable immediate and short-term follow-up outcome. However, long-term follow-up studies are required to assess its safety and long-term efficacy.