MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042076825 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181f32ca5

Surgical Treatment of Unstable Type II Odontoid Fractures in Skeletally Mature Individuals

2010· review· en· W2042076825 on OpenAlexaff
Alpesh A. Patel, Ron Lindsey, Jason T. Bessey, Jens R. Chapman, Raja Rampersaud

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of literature. OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal indications and methods of surgical treatment for unstable type II odontoid fractures in skeletally mature individuals. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Odontoid fractures are a frequently encountered injury pattern in the cervical spine. The surgical treatment of type II odontoid fractures varies among spinal surgeons. The optimal surgical indications and treatment for type II odontoid fractures remains unclear. METHODS: Five primary research questions, based on safety and efficacy, were determined by consensus of a panel of spine trauma surgeons consisting of fellowship trained orthopedic and neurologic surgeons. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using MeSH search terms in MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. The quality of literature was rated as high, moderate, low, or very low. Using the GRADE evidence-based review system, the primary questions were answered using the literature review and expert opinion. These treatment recommendations were then rated as either strong or weak based on the quality of evidence and clinical expertise. RESULTS: The initial search resulted in over 1300 results. After initial application of all inclusion and exclusion criteria, 458 abstracts were reviewed from which 22 manuscripts were found to meet all criteria. These were obtained, reviewed, and used to create an evidentiary table. All articles were of either low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: There is no moderate or high quality literature on the surgical management of acute type II odontoid fractures. Optimal indications for either anterior or posterior treatment of fractures are described but with no comparative data. A single anterior odontoid screw is the recommended technique for anterior treatment. Posterior internal fixation (C1-C2 transarticular screw, C1-C2 segmental fixation) is the recommended technique for posterior treatment. In equivocally indicated instances, anterior or posterior treatment can be safely used with good outcome. In this scenario, surgical management decision should be influenced by surgeon and patient preference as well as cost considerations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207