MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003950773 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000000212

Radiological Evidence of Spontaneous Spinal Arthrodesis in Patients With Lower Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

2014· article· en· W2003950773 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin T. Huang, Owoicho Adogwa, Ranjith Babu, Shivanand P. Lad, Carlos A. Bagley, Oren N. Gottfried

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpondylolisthesisArthrodesisRadiological weaponSpinal fusionLumbarSurgeryLumbar vertebraeSacrumRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a consecutive series of patients with radiological evidence of spondylolisthesis. OBJECTIVE: To establish the incidence and characteristics of spontaneous spinal arthrodesis in the setting of lower lumbar spondylolisthesis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spontaneous spinal arthrodesis of lumbar spondylolisthesis is a finding that is not discussed in the literature outside of isolated case reports. Identifying spontaneous spinal arthrodesis may impact the surgical plan, as patients with existing fusion may not require instrumentation and might require more work to reduce their spondylolisthesis. METHODS: We reviewed a consecutive series of 1490 lumbar spine computed tomography scans from the year 2010 for radiological evidence of spondylolisthesis at either L4-L5 or L5-S1. Patients were excluded if they had undergone previous lumbar surgery. Scans were assessed for the presence of spontaneous fusion based on the following criteria: (1) a solid bridging anterior or posterior vertebral body osteophyte, (2) contiguous bone formation from one vertebral body to another, or (3) contiguous bone across the facet joints bilaterally. Patients were characterized by demographic variables, radiological characteristics including type of spondylolisthesis, and presenting symptomology. Differences between patients in the fused and nonfused cohorts were compared with univariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 86 separate instances of spondylolisthesis were identified, of which 18 (20.9%) had radiological evidence of spontaneous fusion. The most common site of fusion was in the bilateral facets, followed by directly in the intervertebral disc space, and bridging osteophytes adjoining the vertebral bodies. There were significant differences between patients in the fused and nonfused cohorts in terms of average age (fused: 74.3 ± 10.7 yr vs. nonfused: 63.3 ± 18.6 yr, P = 0.019), sex (fused: 88.9% female vs. nonfused: 57.4% female, P = 0.013), and rate of pars defects (fused: 11.1% vs. nonfused: 35.3%, P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: In this study, 20.9% of patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis have radiological signs of spontaneous fusion. Further work is needed to better characterize the natural history and clinical-radiological correlation of spontaneous fusion in spondylolisthesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

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)0.007
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207