Posterolateral and Anterior Interbody Spinal Fusion Models in the Sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Posterolateral and anterior interbody spinal arthrodesis is a frequent procedure, but high nonunion rates are reported and harvesting autologous bone graft from the iliac crest significantly increases morbidity. Bone graft substitutes are an alternative, but to date clinical results are not conclusive. Bone substitutes can be organic or inorganic, biologic or synthetic. They can have osteoconductive properties, inductive properties or both. Animal experiments are essential to investigating bone substitutes using biomechanical and histologic methods not available in clinical studies. Few authors reported on instrumented anterior fusion models, but none used the sheep model. In the current study posterolateral and anterior interbody fusion models in sheep are described. Both models used instrumented fusions, applying porous mineral scaffolds, alone or mixed with bone. The surgical techniques are described step-by-step and potential difficulties are highlighted. Preliminary results are reported for the posterolateral fusion model using coralline graft substitutes. The coral granules mixed with locally harvested bone had fusion outcomes similar to pure autologous bone. The graft substitute showed marked resorption between 12 and 20 weeks. All fusions had bone cortex and good trabecular connectivity. Histologic evaluation suggests after 20 weeks nearly the entire surface of the substitute is covered with new bone. Porous mineral bone substitutes mixed with locally harvested autologous bone are thought to be a valid alternative for posterolateral fusions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".