MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008905172 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181d9527e

Spinal Fusion for Spastic Neuromuscular Scoliosis

2010· article· en· W2008905172 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn A. Keeler, Lawrence G. Lenke, Christopher R. Good, Keith H. Bridwell, Brenda A. Sides, Scott J. Luhmann

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryScoliosisSpinal fusionCerebral palsyRetrospective cohort studyRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiographic and clinical study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the complications and radiographic outcomes of 2 types of surgical treatments, posterior-only fusion and circumferential fusion, in patients with nonambulatory quadriplegic cerebral palsy treated with adjunctive intraoperative halo-femoral traction. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Circumferential anterior-posterior spinal fusion (A/PSF) has been used to improve deformity correction and rate of fusion in patients with neuromuscular scoliosis (NMS) but is associated with increased morbidity. Anterior procedures may increase operative time (OR time) and estimated blood loss (EBL) as well as compromise pulmonary function. Posterior-only spinal fusion (PSF-only) may be sufficient, thereby forgoing the need for the anterior approach without sacrificing deformity correction or outcome. METHODS: Twenty-six patients (age <21 years) who underwent PSF-only for spastic NMS (quadriplegic cerebral palsy) were matched with a comparison cohort of 26 patients who underwent A/PSF (11 staged, 15 same day). All posterior fusions extended from the proximal thoracic spine (T2/T3) to the pelvis. Anterior fusions used a thoracoabdominal approach. All 52 patients underwent intraoperative halo-femoral traction. Mean follow-up for PSF-only was 2.9 years and A/PSF 3.3 years. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in demographic data or preoperative radiographic measures. The PSF-only group had statistically significant shorter OR time (6.1 vs. 10.3 hours), lower EBL (873 vs. 1361 mL), lower frequency of postoperative intubation (38% vs. 81%), shorter length of postoperative intubation (2 vs. 6.5 days), and lower frequency of postoperative pulmonary complications (7.7% vs. 26.9%). There were no statistically significant differences at the final follow-up for thoracolumbar/lumbar curve Cobb, % correction of thoracolumbar/lumbar Cobb, pelvic obliquity, C7 plumb line and the center sacral vertical line, sagittal T5-T12, sagittal T10-L2, and sagittal T12-S1 Cobb measurements. There were no halo-femoral traction-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: When intraoperative halo-femoral traction is used, PSF-only surgery for NMS can provide excellent curve correction and spinal balance. In this study, the PSF-only group had shorter OR time, lower EBL, lower frequency of postoperative intubation, and fewer cases of pneumonias when compared with A/PSF with similar radiographic outcomes at 2-year follow-up.

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)0.001
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations53
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207