Clinical Phenotypes of Oral and Maxillofacial Space Infection: Derivation, External Assessment, and Prognostic Evaluation
4 affiliations
- 1State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
- 2Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250012, China
- 3Center for Oral Health, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200025, China
- 4Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Oral and maxillofacial space infection (OMSI) has heterogeneous clinical presentations. We aimed to derive candidate clinical phenotypes at hospital presentation and assess their external structural reproducibility and prognostic value beyond anatomical severity. Methods: This two-center retrospective study included 287 patients in the development cohort and 51 in the external cohort. Consensus k-means clustering was performed using 24 presentation variables across 20 imputed datasets, followed by frozen external phenotype assignment. Firth’s bias-reduced logistic regression was used to fit the traditional severity score (TSS), phenotype-only, and combined models for the recorded primary composite outcome of intensive care unit admission, tracheostomy, septic shock, or descending mediastinal infection. Phenotype assignments remained fixed during bootstrap internal validation. Results: Four candidate phenotypes showed different inflammatory, physiological, and metabolic profiles. The febrile and glucose-dominant phenotypes both had elevated inflammatory markers but differed in temperature and glucose levels. A history of diabetes was recorded in 29 of 31 patients in the glucose-dominant phenotype. The primary composite outcome occurred in 35/287 (12.2%) and 22/51 (43.1%) patients in the development and external cohorts, respectively. Independent external clustering showed limited agreement with the frozen assignments (adjusted Rand index = 0.320). Bootstrap optimism-corrected areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were 0.798, 0.631, and 0.799 for the TSS, phenotype-only, and combined models, respectively. The corresponding external AUCs were 0.926, 0.665, and 0.891. All three frozen models underestimated absolute risk in the external cohort (observed-to-expected ratios: 4.425, 3.620, and 4.424, respectively). Conclusions: The candidate phenotypes described overlapping inflammatory, physiological, and metabolic patterns at presentation. Independent external clustering showed limited structural agreement, and adding phenotype membership to TSS did not consistently improve prognostic discrimination. Their role in clinical decision-making requires further evaluation.
Related
- An explainable artificial intelligence system for prognostic assessment and decision support in diabetic foot ulcer care: a multicentre derivation and validation study with prospective randomised evaluation
- Development and Population-Based Prognostic Utility Assessment of an ICD-10-CM-Based Prediction Model to Identify Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction: Discrimination Performance and Population-Based Evaluation in 83,357 Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome
- Latent class analysis identifies three biologically distinct phenotypes among patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy: a derivation and temporal validation study
- A competency-based assessment system for undergraduate oral and maxillofacial surgery internship: development and pilot validation.
- Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score as a Predictor of Intensive Care Unit Mortality in Patients With Maxillofacial Trauma: A Prospective Observational Study.
BibTeX
@article{zhang2026clinical,
title = {{Clinical Phenotypes of Oral and Maxillofacial Space Infection: Derivation, External Assessment, and Prognostic Evaluation}},
author = {Baotian Zhang and Kaixiao Yan and Liao Wang and Wei Zeng and Yutao Xiong and Wei Tang and Chang Liu},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218414},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8414},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Clinical Phenotypes of Oral and Maxillofacial Space Infection: Derivation, External Assessment, and Prognostic Evaluation
AU - Baotian Zhang
AU - Kaixiao Yan
AU - Liao Wang
AU - Wei Zeng
AU - Yutao Xiong
AU - Wei Tang
AU - Chang Liu
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218414
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8414
AB - Background/Objectives: Oral and maxillofacial space infection (OMSI) has heterogeneous clinical presentations. We aimed to derive candidate clinical phenotypes at hospital presentation and assess their external structural reproducibility and prognostic value beyond anatomical severity. Methods: This two-center retrospective study included 287 patients in the development cohort and 51 in the external cohort. Consensus k-means clustering was performed using 24 presentation variables across 20 imputed datasets, followed by frozen external phenotype assignment. Firth’s bias-reduced logistic regression was used to fit the traditional severity score (TSS), phenotype-only, and combined models for the recorded primary composite outcome of intensive care unit admission, tracheostomy, septic shock, or descending mediastinal infection. Phenotype assignments remained fixed during bootstrap internal validation. Results: Four candidate phenotypes showed different inflammatory, physiological, and metabolic profiles. The febrile and glucose-dominant phenotypes both had elevated inflammatory markers but differed in temperature and glucose levels. A history of diabetes was recorded in 29 of 31 patients in the glucose-dominant phenotype. The primary composite outcome occurred in 35/287 (12.2%) and 22/51 (43.1%) patients in the development and external cohorts, respectively. Independent external clustering showed limited agreement with the frozen assignments (adjusted Rand index = 0.320). Bootstrap optimism-corrected areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) were 0.798, 0.631, and 0.799 for the TSS, phenotype-only, and combined models, respectively. The corresponding external AUCs were 0.926, 0.665, and 0.891. All three frozen models underestimated absolute risk in the external cohort (observed-to-expected ratios: 4.425, 3.620, and 4.424, respectively). Conclusions: The candidate phenotypes described overlapping inflammatory, physiological, and metabolic patterns at presentation. Independent external clustering showed limited structural agreement, and adding phenotype membership to TSS did not consistently improve prognostic discrimination. Their role in clinical decision-making requires further evaluation.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -