MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000122675 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000000222

Biomechanical Risk Factors for Proximal Junctional Kyphosis

2014· article· en· W2000122675 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 · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsMedtronic (Canada)Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePolytechnique MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKyphosisSagittal planeVertebraAnatomyOrthodonticsDeformityCadaverFacetectomySurgeryRadiographyLaminectomySpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Study Design. Biomechanical analysis of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) through computer simulations and sensitivity analysis. Objective. To gain biomechanical knowledge on the risk of PJK and find surgical solutions to reduce the risks. Summary of Background Data. PJK is a pathological kyphotic deformity adjacent to the instrumentation. Clinical studies have documented its risk factors, but still little is known on how it is correlated with various individual instrumentation variables. Methods. Biomechanical spine models of 6 patients with adult scoliosis were developed, validated, and then used to perform 576 simulations, varying the proximal dissection procedure, the implant type at the upper instrumented vertebra, the sagittal rod curvature, and the proximal diameter of the proximal transition rods. Four biomechanical indices—the proximal junctional kyphotic angle, thoracic kyphosis, proximal flexion force, and proximal flexion moment—were assessed. Results. The bilateral complete facetectomy, the posterior ligaments resection, and the combination of both increased the proximal junctional kyphotic angle (respectively, by 10%, 28% and 53%) and the proximal flexion force (4%, 12%, and 22%) and moment (16%, 44%, and 83%). Compared with pedicle screws at upper instrumented vertebra, proximal transverse process hooks reduced the 3 biomechanical indices by approximately 26%. The use of proximal transition rods with reduced proximal diameter from 5.5 mm to 4 mm decreased the proximal junctional kyphotic angle (by 6%) and the proximal flexion force (4%) and moment (8%). The increase of the sagittal rod curvature from 10° to 20°, 30°, and 40° increased the proximal junctional kyphotic angle (by 6%, 13%, and 19%) and the proximal flexion force (3%, 7%, and 10%) and moment (9%, 18%, and 27%). Conclusion. Preserving more posterior proximal intervertebral elements, the use of transition rods and transverse process hooks at upper instrumented vertebra, and reducing the global sagittal rod curvature each decreased the 4 biomechanical indices that may be involved in PJK. Level of Evidence: N/A The individual effect of 4 independent instrumentation variables on the proximal junctional kyphosis was investigated through numerical simulations. The biomechanics of the proximal junctional spinal segment could be improved by reducing posterior bony resection, ligament dissection, and sagittal rod curvature, and using tapered transition rods and transverse process hooks at upper instrumented vertebra.

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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.270 · 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