International surveillance study in acute spinal cord injury confirms viability of multinational clinical trials.
Aging
Benchmark
Epidemiological shift
Functional recovery
Neurological recovery
Spinal cord injury
Surveillance study
Journal
BMC medicine
ISSN: 1741-7015
Titre abrégé: BMC Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190723
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 06 2022
14 06 2022
Historique:
received:
04
01
2022
accepted:
04
05
2022
entrez:
15
6
2022
pubmed:
16
6
2022
medline:
18
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The epidemiological international landscape of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) has evolved over the last decades along with given inherent differences in acute care and rehabilitation across countries and jurisdictions. However, to what extent these differences may influence neurological and functional recovery as well as the integrity of international trials is unclear. The latter also relates to historical clinical data that are exploited to inform clinical trial design and as potential comparative data. Epidemiological and clinical data of individuals with traumatic and ischemic SCI enrolled in the European Multi-Center Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) were analyzed. Mixed-effect models were employed to account for the longitudinal nature of the data, efficiently handle missing data, and adjust for covariates. The primary outcomes comprised demographics/injury characteristics and standard scores to quantify neurological (i.e., motor and sensory scores examined according to the International Standards for the Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury) and functional recovery (walking function). We externally validated our findings leveraging data from a completed North American landmark clinical trial. A total of 4601 patients with acute SCI were included. Over the course of 20 years, the ratio of male to female patients remained stable at 3:1, while the distribution of age at injury significantly shifted from unimodal (2001/02) to bimodal distribution (2019). The proportional distribution of injury severities and levels remained stable with the largest percentages of motor complete injuries. Both, the rate and pattern of neurological and functional recovery, remained unchanged throughout the surveillance period despite the increasing age at injury. The findings related to recovery profiles were confirmed by an external validation cohort (n=791). Lastly, we built an open-access and online surveillance platform ("Neurosurveillance") to interactively exploit the study results and beyond. Despite some epidemiological changes and considerable advances in clinical management and rehabilitation, the neurological and functional recovery following SCI has remained stable over the last two decades. Our study, including a newly created open-access and online surveillance tool, constitutes an unparalleled resource to inform clinical practice and implementation of forthcoming clinical trials targeting neural repair and plasticity in acute spinal cord injury.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The epidemiological international landscape of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) has evolved over the last decades along with given inherent differences in acute care and rehabilitation across countries and jurisdictions. However, to what extent these differences may influence neurological and functional recovery as well as the integrity of international trials is unclear. The latter also relates to historical clinical data that are exploited to inform clinical trial design and as potential comparative data.
METHODS
Epidemiological and clinical data of individuals with traumatic and ischemic SCI enrolled in the European Multi-Center Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI) were analyzed. Mixed-effect models were employed to account for the longitudinal nature of the data, efficiently handle missing data, and adjust for covariates. The primary outcomes comprised demographics/injury characteristics and standard scores to quantify neurological (i.e., motor and sensory scores examined according to the International Standards for the Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury) and functional recovery (walking function). We externally validated our findings leveraging data from a completed North American landmark clinical trial.
RESULTS
A total of 4601 patients with acute SCI were included. Over the course of 20 years, the ratio of male to female patients remained stable at 3:1, while the distribution of age at injury significantly shifted from unimodal (2001/02) to bimodal distribution (2019). The proportional distribution of injury severities and levels remained stable with the largest percentages of motor complete injuries. Both, the rate and pattern of neurological and functional recovery, remained unchanged throughout the surveillance period despite the increasing age at injury. The findings related to recovery profiles were confirmed by an external validation cohort (n=791). Lastly, we built an open-access and online surveillance platform ("Neurosurveillance") to interactively exploit the study results and beyond.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite some epidemiological changes and considerable advances in clinical management and rehabilitation, the neurological and functional recovery following SCI has remained stable over the last two decades. Our study, including a newly created open-access and online surveillance tool, constitutes an unparalleled resource to inform clinical practice and implementation of forthcoming clinical trials targeting neural repair and plasticity in acute spinal cord injury.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35705947
doi: 10.1186/s12916-022-02395-0
pii: 10.1186/s12916-022-02395-0
pmc: PMC9202190
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
225Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Dietz V, Fouad K. Restoration of sensorimotor functions after spinal cord injury. Brain. 2014;137:654–67.
pubmed: 24103913
doi: 10.1093/brain/awt262
Tator CH. Update on the pathophysiology and pathology of acute spinal cord injury. Brain Pathol. 1995;5:407–13.
pubmed: 8974623
doi: 10.1111/j.1750-3639.1995.tb00619.x
Ramer LM, Ramer MS, Bradbury EJ. Restoring function after spinal cord injury: towards clinical translation of experimental strategies. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(12):1241–56.
pubmed: 25453463
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70144-9
Rabadi MH, Mayanna SK, Vincent AS. Predictors of mortality in veterans with traumatic spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2013;51(10):784–8.
pubmed: 23896672
doi: 10.1038/sc.2013.77
National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center. Facts and figures at a glance. Birmingham: University of Alabama at Birmingham, 2020. Natl Spinal Cord Inj Stat Cent; 2020.
Samuel AM, Bohl DD, Basques BA, et al. Analysis of delays to surgery for cervical spinal cord injuries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(13):992–1000.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000883
Vale FL, Burns J, Jackson AB, Hadley MN. Combined medical and surgical treatment after acute spinal cord injury: results of a prospective pilot study to assess the merits of aggressive medical resuscitation and blood pressure management. J Neurosurg. 1997;87:239–46.
pubmed: 9254087
doi: 10.3171/jns.1997.87.2.0239
Saliba M, Saadeh D, Bouchand F, et al. Outcome of bloodstream infections among spinal cord injury patients and impact of multidrug-resistant organisms. Spinal Cord. 2017;55(2):148–54.
pubmed: 27995941
doi: 10.1038/sc.2016.176
Cheng CL, Plashkes T, Shen T, et al. Does specialized inpatient rehabilitation affect whether or not people with traumatic spinal cord injury return home? J Neurotrauma. 2017;34(20):2867–76.
pubmed: 28447870
doi: 10.1089/neu.2016.4930
DeVivo MJ, Krause JS, Lammertse DP. Recent trends in mortality and causes of death among persons with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(11):1411–9.
pubmed: 10569435
doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90252-6
Finnerup NB, Attal N, Haroutounian S, et al. Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:162–73.
pubmed: 25575710
pmcid: 4493167
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70251-0
Devivo MJ. Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury: trends and future implications. Spinal Cord. 2012;50(5):365–72.
pubmed: 22270188
doi: 10.1038/sc.2011.178
Hagen EM, Eide GE, Rekand T, Gilhus NE, Gronning M. A 50-year follow-up of the incidence of traumatic spinal cord injuries in Western Norway. Spinal Cord. 2010;48(4):313–8.
pubmed: 19823192
doi: 10.1038/sc.2009.133
Toda M, Nakatani E, Omae K, Fukushima M, Chin T. Age-specific characterization of spinal cord injuries over a 19-year period at a Japanese rehabilitation center. PLoS One. 2018;13(3):e0195120.
pubmed: 29596516
pmcid: 5875854
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195120
von Elm E, Altman D, Pocock D, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke J. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STRO BE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ. 2007;335:20–2.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD
Kirshblum S, Snider B, Rupp R, Read MS. Updates of the international standards for neurologic classification of spinal cord injury: 2015 and 2019. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2020;31(3):319–30.
pubmed: 32624097
doi: 10.1016/j.pmr.2020.03.005
Kirshblum SC, Burns SP, Biering-Sorensen F, et al. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury (revised 2011). J Spinal Cord Med. 2011;34:535–46.
pubmed: 22330108
pmcid: 3232636
doi: 10.1179/204577211X13207446293695
Scivoletto G, Torre M, Mammone A, et al. Acute traumatic and ischemic spinal cord injuries have a comparable course of recovery. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2020;34(8):723–32.
pubmed: 32659165
doi: 10.1177/1545968320939569
Schuld C, Wiese J, Hug A, et al. Computer implementation of the international standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury for consistent and efficient derivation of its subscores including handling of data from not testable segments. J Neurotrauma. 2012;29(3):453–61.
pubmed: 21933016
doi: 10.1089/neu.2011.2085
Catz A, Itzkovich M, Steinberg F, et al. The Catz-Itzkovich SCIM: a revised version of the spinal cord independence measure. Disabil Rehabil. 2001;23(6):263–8.
pubmed: 11336099
doi: 10.1080/096382801750110919
Itzkovich M, Shefler H, Front L, et al. SCIM III (Spinal cord independence measure version III): reliability of assessment by interview and comparison with assessment by observation. Spinal Cord. 2018;56(1):46–51.
pubmed: 28895576
doi: 10.1038/sc.2017.97
Ditunno JF, Ditunno PL, Scivoletto G, et al. The Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury (WISCI/WISCI II): nature, metric properties, use and misuse. Spinal Cord. 2013;51(5):346–55.
pubmed: 23459122
doi: 10.1038/sc.2013.9
Van Hedel HJ, Wirz M, Dietz V. Assessing walking ability in subjects with spinal cord injury: validity and reliability of 3 walking tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(2):190–6.
pubmed: 15706542
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.02.010
Marino RJ, Barros T, Biering-Sorensen F, et al. International standards for neurological classification of spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2003;26(Suppl 1):S50–6 Accessed at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4066420&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract%5Cn http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16296564 .
pubmed: 16296564
doi: 10.1080/10790268.2003.11754575
Diggle PJ, Heagerty PJ, Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Time-dependent covariates (Chapter 12). In: Anal. Longitud. Data; 2002. p. 245–81.
Simpson SL, Edwards LJ, Muller KE, Sen PK, Styner MA. A linear exponent AR(1) family of correlation structures. Stat Med. 2010;29:1825–38.
pubmed: 20658550
pmcid: 4020183
doi: 10.1002/sim.3928
Gelman A, Hill J, Yajima M. Why we (usually) don’t have to worry about multiple comparisons. J Res Educ Eff. 2012;5(2):189–211.
Geisler FH, Coleman WP, Grieco G, Poonian D, Group SS, Sygen Study Group. The Sygen multicenter acute spinal cord injury study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:S87–98 Accessed at: http://0.180.35.174 .
doi: 10.1097/00007632-200112151-00015
Chang W, Cheng J, Allaire J, Xie Y, McPherson J. Package ‘ shiny ’: web application framework for R. R Package; 2020.
Chang W, Ribeiro BB. Package “ShinyDashboard”: create dashboards with “Shiny”; 2018. p. 27. Accessed at: https://github.com/rstudio/shinydashboard
Devivo MJ, Chen Y. Trends in new injuries, prevalent cases, and aging with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(3):332–8.
pubmed: 21353817
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.08.031
Chen Y, DeVivo MJ, Richards JS, SanAgustin TB. Spinal cord injury model systems: review of program and national database from 1970 to 2015. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(10):1797–804.
pubmed: 27671806
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2016.02.027
Chamberlain JD, Deriaz O, Hund-Georgiadis M, et al. Epidemiology and contemporary risk profile of traumatic spinal cord injury in Switzerland. Inj Epidemiol. 2015;2(1):28.
pubmed: 26550554
pmcid: 4630259
doi: 10.1186/s40621-015-0061-4
Lapteva ES, Tsutsunava MR, Podoprigora GM, Diachkova-Gertseva DS. Falls in the elderly and senior age prevention perspectives. Adv Gerontol = Uspekhi Gerontol. 2019;32:469–76.
Chen Y, Tang Y, Allen V, DeVivo MJ. Aging and spinal cord injury: external causes of injury and implications for prevention. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2015;21:218–26.
pubmed: 26363588
pmcid: 4568084
doi: 10.1310/sci2103-218
Perrott GSJ, Holland DF. Population trends and problems of public health. Milbank Q. 2005;83(4):569–608.
pubmed: 16279960
pmcid: 2690260
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00393.x
Franceschini M, Bazo HC, Lauretani F, Agosti M, Pagliacci MC. Age influences rehabilitative outcomes in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Aging Clin Exp Res. 2011;23(3):202–8.
pubmed: 21993167
doi: 10.1007/BF03324961
Jensen MP, Truitt AR, Schomer KG, Yorkston KM, Baylor C, Molton IR. Frequency and age effects of secondary health conditions in individuals with spinal cord injury: a scoping review. Spinal Cord. 2013;51(12):882–92.
pubmed: 24126851
doi: 10.1038/sc.2013.112
Knútsdóttir S, Thórisdóttir H, Sigvaldason K, Jónsson H, Björnsson A, Ingvarsson P. Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injuries in Iceland from 1975 to 2009. Spinal Cord. 2012;50(2):123–6.
pubmed: 21946442
doi: 10.1038/sc.2011.105
Curt A, Van Hedel HJA, Klaus D, Dietz V. Recovery from a spinal cord injury: significance of compensation, neural plasticity, and repair. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25:677–85.
pubmed: 18578636
doi: 10.1089/neu.2007.0468
Lee BA, Leiby BE, Marino RJ. Neurological and functional recovery after thoracic spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2016;39:67–76 Taylor & Francis.
pubmed: 25520184
pmcid: 4725794
doi: 10.1179/2045772314Y.0000000280
Kramer JLK, Lammertse DP, Schubert M, Curt A, Steeves JD. Relationship between motor recovery and independence after sensorimotor-complete cervical spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;26:1064–71.
doi: 10.1177/1545968312447306
Warner FMFM, Cragg JJJJ, Jutzeler CRCR, et al. Early administration of gabapentinoids improves motor recovery after human spinal cord injury. Cell Rep. 2017;18:1614–8.
pubmed: 28199834
doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.01.048
Warner FM, Jutzeler CR, Cragg JJ, et al. The effect of non-gabapentinoid anticonvulsants on sensorimotor recovery after human spinal cord injury. CNS Drugs. 2019;33(5):503–11.
pubmed: 30949923
doi: 10.1007/s40263-019-00622-6
Failli V, Kopp MA, Gericke C, et al. Functional neurological recovery after spinal cord injury is impaired in patients with infections. Brain. 2012;135(Pt 11):3238–50.
pubmed: 23100450
doi: 10.1093/brain/aws267
Behrman AL, Bowden MG, Nair PM. Neuroplasticity after spinal cord injury and training: an emerging paradigm shift in rehabilitation and walking recovery. Phys Ther. 2006;86(10):1406–25.
pubmed: 17012645
doi: 10.2522/ptj.20050212
Jaja BNR, Badhiwala J, Guest J, et al. Trajectory-based classification of recovery in sensorimotor complete traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. Neurology. 2021;96(22):e2736–48.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000012028
Wilson JR, Jaja BNR, Kwon BK, et al. Natural history, predictors of outcome, and effects of treatment in thoracic spinal cord injury: a multi-center cohort study from the North American Clinical Trials Network. J Neurotrauma. 2018;35(21):2554–60.
pubmed: 29665733
doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5535
Schwartz SM, Wildenhaus K, Bucher A, Byrd B. Digital twins and the emerging science of self: implications for digital health experience design and “small” data. Front Comput Sci. 2020;2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2020.00031 .
Ramagopalan SV, Simpson A, Sammon C. Can real-world data really replace randomised clinical trials? BMC Med. 2020;18(1):13.
pubmed: 31937304
pmcid: 6961357
doi: 10.1186/s12916-019-1481-8
Viele K, Berry S, Neuenschwander B, et al. Use of historical control data for assessing treatment effects in clinical trials. Pharm Stat. 2014;13(1):41–54.
pubmed: 23913901
doi: 10.1002/pst.1589
Mulcahey MJ, Jones LAT, Rockhold F, et al. Adaptive trial designs for spinal cord injury clinical trials directed to the central nervous system. Spinal Cord. 2020;58(12):1235–48.
pubmed: 32939028
doi: 10.1038/s41393-020-00547-8