Critical evaluation of outcome scales to assess outcome after lateral ankle ligament repair

Introduction: Several scores are commonly used to evaluate patients' postoperative satisfaction after lateral ankle ligament repair, including: AOFAS, FAAM, CAIT and CAIS. Comparing published studies in the literature is difficult, as the same patient can have markedly different results depending on which scoring system is used. The current study aims to address this gap in the literature by developing a system to compare these tests, to allow better analysis and comparison of published studies. Patients and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of 47 patients following lateral ankle ligament repair using a modified Broström-Gould technique. All patients were operated between 2005 and 2010 by a single surgeon and followed the same post operative rehabilitation protocol. Six patients were excluded from the study because of concomitant surgery. Patients were assessed by an independent observer. We used the Pearson correlation coefficient to analyse the concordance of the scores, as well as scatter plots to assess the linear relationship between them. Results: A linear distribution between the scores was found when the results were analysed using scatter plots. We were thus able to use the Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the relationship between each of the different postoperative scores. The correlation was found to be above 0.5 in all cases except for the comparison between the CAIT and the FAAM for the activities of daily living (0.39). We were, therefore, able to compare the results obtained and assess the relative concordance of the scoring systems. The results showed that the more specific the scale is, the worst the score is and inversely. So the CAIT and the CAIS appeared to be more severe than the AOFAS and the FAAM measuring the activities of daily living. The sports subscale of the FAAM demonstrated intermediate results. Conclusion: This study outlines a system to compare different postoperative scores commonly used to evaluate outcome after ankle stabilization surgery. The impact of this study is that it makes comparison of published studies easier, even though they use a variety of different clinical scores, thus facilitating better outcome analysis of operative techniques.

Superior outcome of women with stage I/II cutaneous melanoma: pooled analysis of four European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trials.

PURPOSE: Several studies observed a female advantage in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma, for which behavioral factors or an underlying biologic mechanism might be responsible. Using complete and reliable follow-up data from four phase III trials of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Melanoma Group, we explored the female advantage across multiple end points and in relation to other important prognostic indicators. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with localized melanoma were included in EORTC adjuvant treatment trials 18832, 18871, 18952, and 18961 and randomly assigned during the period of 1984 to 2005. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for women compared with men, adjusted for age, Breslow thickness, body site, ulceration, performed lymph node dissection, and treatment. RESULTS: A total of 2,672 patients with stage I/II melanoma were included. Women had a highly consistent and independent advantage in overall survival (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.83), disease-specific survival (adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.88), time to lymph node metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.96), and time to distant metastasis (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.81). Subgroup analysis showed that the female advantage was consistent across all prognostic subgroups (with the possible exception of head and neck melanomas) and in pre- and postmenopausal age groups. CONCLUSION: Women have a consistent and independent relative advantage in all aspects of the progression of localized melanoma of approximately 30%, most likely caused by an underlying biologic sex difference.