MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reconstruction after Total Sacrectomy

2005· article· en· W2062500381 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryArthrodesisSacrumSagittal planeOrthopedic surgeryLumbarRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Nine patients had sacrectomy with ilio-lumbar arthrodesis for treatment of sacral malignancies at our institution between 2000 and 2004. Five patients had total sacrectomy, three had a sagittal hemisacrectomy, and one had an extended internal hemipelvectomy Type I-S. The average patient age was 39 years. Tumors were Stage IIB in seven patients and Stage IB in two patients. A combined anteroposterior approach was used and a wide surgical margin was attained in all seven patients. A new form of reconstruction using structural fibular grafts and pedicle screw-rod instrumentation was used to create a triangular construct along the anatomic force transmission vectors from the femoral heads to the lumbar spine. The average followup was 18 months. At latest followup, seven patients were alive with no evidence of disease, and two had died from disease. One patient suffered postoperative infection. Independent ambulation was noted in seven patients at last followup. Eight patients had stable reconstructions at latest followup (one patient, who died in December 2004, had a stable reconstruction and was walking with braces and a walker before her death). One patient had instrumentation failure twice and had additional revision instrumentation and bone grafting procedures. She eventually obtained a solid lumbopelvic fusion and walks with Canadian crutches and ankle-foot orthoses. The technique of reconstruction reported here offers promise in dealing with the challenges of reestablishing spinopelvic stability in this difficult anatomic location. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level IV-1 (case series). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.361 · 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