MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007976724 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181a0934f

Translaminar Screw Fixation of the Lumbar Spine

2009· article· en· W2007976724 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Aepli, Anne F. Mannion, Dieter Grob

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
FundersEUROSPINE
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryRadiographyLumbarFixation (population genetics)SpondylolisthesisFacet (psychology)PopulationRetrospective cohort studyConfoundingLumbar spineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term results after translaminar screw fixation of the lumbar spine in a large group of patients and to identify predictors of a good outcome. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Translaminar screw fixation represents an alternative operative technique to transpedicular fixation systems for short-segment lumbar fusion. The strategy behind this technique is to block the facet joints with perforating screws. Although the method has been in use for more than 20 years, few studies reporting the long-term outcome in large groups of patients are to be found in the literature. METHODS: The Core Outcome Measures Index, a multidimensional outcome questionnaire, was sent to 643 consecutive patients who had undergone lumbar fusion with translaminar screws between 1987 and 2004, for various degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Patients also rated the global outcome and their satisfaction with treatment. Disc height was measured from preoperative radiographs using the distortion compensated roentgen analysis method. 476 patients (74%) completed and returned the questionnaire. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with a good outcome. RESULTS: After an average follow-up period of 10 years (range: 2-20 years) 352 of 476 patients (74%) reported that the operation had either "helped a lot" or "helped" (good outcome); 124 of 476 patients (26%) declared that it "helped only little," "didn't help," or "made things worse" (poor outcome). Controlling for potential confounders, a preoperative disc height <80% of that reported for a normal population was the most significant unique predictor of a good outcome (OR = 14.86, 95% CI: 6.77-32.61, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Translaminar screw fixation is a straightforward and effective technique for short-segment fusion in the lumbar spine. For patients with a strict indication for spondylodesis, intact posterior elements (lamina and facets) and a low preoperative disc height, translaminar screw fixation represents a successful fixation technique in the lumbar spine with good long-term results.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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