Posterior Column Reconstruction With Autologous Rib Graft After En Bloc Tumor Excision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of consecutive case series. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of using autologous rib graft for fusion across long posterior column defects. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Achieving fusion across large posterior column defects after en bloc tumor resection can be difficult. Rib graft can be harvested from the local wound, and its shape and structural properties are well suited for reconstruction of thoracic posterior column deficits. METHODS: After Research Ethics Board approval, a retrospective review of the charts of 17 consecutive patients undergoing posterior column reconstruction after en bloc tumor resections was carried out. Autologous vascularized and nonvascularized rib grafts were utilized in 8 and 9 cases, respectively; 14 patients with malignant tumors and 3 with benign etiology. After surgery, patients underwent routine clinical and radiographic follow-up, with a computed tomographic scan performed at a minimum of 6 months in all surviving patients. Clinical and radiographic films were analyzed. RESULTS: Computed tomographic scans at a minimum of 6 months demonstrated graft incorporation in all surviving cases. There was no obvious difference at 6-month imaging to differentiate vascularized from nonvascularized grafts. There were no cases of graft dislodgement or fracture. Graft site morbidity was difficult to isolate from the morbidity of these large procedures. No complications related to the graft were identified. CONCLUSION: The use of autologous rib graft with a proximal step-cut and distal saddle-cut supplemented with posterior instrumentation allowed immediate stabilization of the posterior column defect created by the en bloc tumor resection. This technique of fashioning the graft and taking advantage of its natural curved structure for immediate press-fit was associated with graft incorporation in our cases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".