MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical Usefulness of Somatosensory Evoked Potentials for Detection of Brachial Plexopathy Secondary to Malpositioning in Scoliosis Surgery

2005· article· en· W1989888125 on OpenAlexaff
Robert D. Labrom, Marilyn Hoskins, Christopher W. Reilly, Stephen J. Tredwell, Peter K. H. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBrachial PlexopathyBrachial plexusSomatosensory evoked potentialScoliosisSurgeryOrthopedic surgeryIntraoperative neurophysiological monitoringAnesthesiaBrachial plexus injuryUlnar nerveDeformity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. A retrospective longitudinal study of 434 consecutive pediatric patients who underwent surgical correction of scoliosis, while being monitored for positional brachial plexopathy. Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of intermittent monitoring of ulnar nerve somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) for detecting brachial plexus injury caused by malpositioning during scoliosis surgery. Summary of Background Data. Continuous intraoperative SSEP monitoring for spinal cord function has been well reported, and is widely accepted as the standard for spinal deformity correction surgery to detect and avoid neurologic injury. The use of SSEPs for the monitoring of ulnar nerve function intraoperatively as an indicator of brachial plexus function is becoming more accepted as a valid and useful technique to minimize intraoperative neurologic injuries during deformity corrections. Methods. A review was conducted to assess the effect of ulnar nerve SSEP monitoring, as a measure of brachial plexus function, during anterior, posterior, or combined approach surgeries. The type of scoliosis, type of surgery and positioning, and surgical event at noted amplitude decrease were included in an analysis of variance for repeated measures, and a Student t test was performed for significant differences. Results. A total of 27 patients had ulnar nerve amplitude decreases of ≥30%, resulting in a point prevalence of 6.2% for positional brachial plexopathy during positioning for all scoliosis surgeries. A significant difference was noted between the types of positioning, with prone positioning accounting for a higher rate of brachial plexopathy compared with anterior approach positioning (P < 0.01). No statistical difference exists as to the type of scoliosis present and the incidence of brachial plexopathy (P < 0.01). Conclusions. Avoidance of neurologic injury to the brachial plexus during scoliosis surgery is possible by early detection with ulnar nerve SSEP monitoring. A total of 434 pediatric patients who underwent surgical correction of scoliosis were monitored for positional brachial plexopathy. Prone positioning accounted for a higher rate of brachial plexopathy compared to anterior approach positioning (P < 0.01). Avoidance of neurologic injury to the brachial plexus during scoliosis surgery is possible by early detection with ulnar nerve somatosensory evoked potential monitoring.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic EffectsFrench-language works237,207