MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969467163 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181c6edd7

Comparison of Complications Among Growing Spinal Implants

2010· article· en· W1969467163 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineComplicationKyphosisSurgeryImplantCobb angleMedical recordDeformityImplant failureRetrospective cohort studyRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the complication rate of various types of growing spinal implants. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies report a complication rate of 0.38 to 1.19 per patient in growing spine surgery, but this may be an underestimate. METHODS: Medical records of 36 children with early-onset spinal deformity treated with various types of growing implants by a single surgeon were evaluated for complications. Patients with primary chest wall deformities were excluded. Complications were defined as any neurologic injuries, and any unplanned surgeries for implant failure or infection. Patients were separated into 3 groups: (A) standard dual growing rods, (B) hybrid growing rods with rib anchors proximally and spine anchors distally, and (C) VEPTR (vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib). Statistical analyses were performed to compare the complication rate among the 3 groups and to evaluate the effect of Cobb angle, kyphosis, age, and body mass index on the complication rate. RESULTS: Mean age at initial implantation was 4.8 years; mean follow-up was 51 months (24-117 months). A total of 72 unplanned surgeries occurred in 26 out of 36 patients (72%), including 18 revisions for rod breakage, 31 revisions for migrated anchors, and 18 irrigations and debridements for infection. Two children (5.6%) developed a neurologic deficit that required implant removal. Group A had 23 complications in 10 patients, with a complication rate of 2.3 per patient; group B had 6 complications in 7 patients, with a rate of 0.86 per patient; and group C had 45 complications in 19 patients, with a rate of 2.37 per patient. There was no significant difference between the 3 groups in terms of preoperative Cobb angle, kyphosis, age, and body mass index; these factors did not seem to influence the complication rate. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study directly comparing the complication rates of various types of growing spine implants. The complication rate in growing spine surgery is uniformly high but varies by implant type, with a trend toward fewer complications in hybrid constructs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it