[Our experiences with anterior cervical cages and spacer].
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Between 2001 and 2005 86 patients were treated for cervical disc herniations and spondylosis at our department. Stabilization was performed with different cervical cages or spacer after discectomy and decompression. The aim of the study was to examine the changes of the patients' pain, quality of life and work ability, fusion rate, the intervertebral disc height, changes of under and upper segments and finally curvature of cervical spine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were followed by the authors, clinical examination, lateral and antero-posterior radiographic examinations were performed. They were asked to fill in a questionnaire, concerning their pre- and postoperative pain, quality of life and work ability. The patients' pain was graded using a 10-point analog scale (VAS) and with a simplified, McGill-Melzak analog scale. The quality of life was measured with a 10-graduated analog scale as well. RESULTS: More than 77% of our patients appeared at follow up examination. The fusion rate was 89.3%, operated spaces were held in 61%. In the upper segment of operated space 7%, and in the under-segment 14% were found increasingly degenerated. The curvature of cervical spine of the patients' were 64.51% lordotic, 27.42% straight and 8.07% kyphotic. On average the patients' pain changed on VAS from 8.179 to 5.015; on McGill-Melzak scale from 3.89 to 2.80; quality of life changed from 8.045 to 5.463. CONCLUSION: By the advantage of using cages, the operative approach has become smaller than before, consequently the operative pain has become less too. In addition operation time and hospital stay were significantly shorter (p < 0.005) than using traditional operation approach. The majority of the patients, pain was decreased, quality of life got better. Despite this fact only 3 patients continue their original work and 5 patients do easier work. The majority of our patients were disabled before the operation, but from that time many of them became disabled, in some cases the grade of disability increased. There can be some reasons for it: the majority of the patients have other diseases for example: lumbar spondylosis and disc herniation, hypertension, diabetes, asthma and depression. There is just a few possibility of work for the disabled people. To conclude, with some of the patients, their disability means "the way out" from unemployment. These facts do not decrease the importance and usefulness of this method. Our results with this type of operation are very similar to the international statistics. This method seems to be applicable and useful.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».