Thoracic Disc Herniation in a Patient With Tethered Cord and Lumbar Syringomyelia and Diastematomyelia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Case report. OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic challenges in a patient suffering from thoracic disc herniation (TDH) and spina bifida complicated by multiple lumbar spinal cord abnormalities, i.e., tethered cord, lumbar syringomyelia, and diastematomyelia. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Advances in neuroimaging, i.e., magnetic resonance imaging, increase the sensitivity to disclose both clinically relevant but also other spine and spinal cord abnormalities. TDH accounts for less than 1% of all surgically treated disc herniations. Syringomyelia and diastematomyelia are comparably rare and present with varying degrees of spinal cord dysfunction. METHODS: A 54-year-old women presented with progressive pain and sensorimotor symptoms in the lower back and limbs. Neurologic examination revealed lower limb spastic motor deficits and spinal ataxia. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a T6-T7 disc herniation, with spinal cord signal change in addition to a spina bifida with sacral tethered cord, lumbar syringomyelia, and diastematomyelia. Combined neurophysiological testing identified a neurologic lesion in the mid thoracic cord, with normal lower limb nerve conduction and reflex recordings, but pathologic somatosensory-evoked potential and T6 paravertebral electromyography. RESULTS: The patient was diagnosed with a clinically relevant T6-T7 disc herniation and underwent successful surgical decompression resulting in electrophysiological improvements. CONCLUSION: This unique case highlights the value of electrophysiology in the evaluation of a complex spinal disorder in a patient suffering from acquired TDH in the presence of extensive congenital spine and spinal cord abnormalities. Clinical symptoms and signs can be complemented by neurophysiological techniques to improve diagnostic accuracy and improve the basis for treatment recommendations. In cases involving multiple spinal abnormalities, a comprehensive neurophysiological assessment beyond paravertebral electromyography studies, including nerve conduction and somatosensory-evoked potential recordings, is recommended to assist in confirming the diagnosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".