MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097458689 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.n.00276

Navigated Pelvic Osteotomy and Tumor Resection

2015· article· en· W2097458689 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic and Acetabular Injuries
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronal planeOsteotomySagittal planeOsteotomeCadaverRadiologyNuclear medicineOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This Sawbones and cadaver study was performed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of pelvic bone cuts made with use of a novel navigation system with a navigated osteotome and oscillating saw. METHODS: Using a novel navigation system and a three-dimensional planning tool, we navigated pelvic bone cuts that were representative of typical cuts made in pelvic tumor resections. The system includes a prototype mobile C-arm for intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography, real-time optical tracking (Polaris), and three-dimensional visualization software. Three-dimensional virtual radiographs were utilized in addition to triplanar (axial, sagittal, and coronal) navigation. In part one of the study, we navigated twenty-four sacral bone cuts in Sawbones models and validated our results in sixteen similar cuts in cadavers. In part two, we developed three Sawbones models of pelvic tumors based on actual patient scenarios and compared three navigated resections with three non-navigated resections for each tumor model. Part three assessed the accuracy of the system with multiple users. RESULTS: There were ninety navigated cuts in Sawbones that were compared with fifty-four non-navigated cuts. In the navigated Sawbones cuts, the mean entry and exit cuts were 1.4 ± 1 mm and 1.9 ± 1.2 mm from the planned cuts, respectively. In comparison, the entry and exit cuts in Sawbones that were not navigated were 2.8 ± 4.9 mm and 3.5 ± 4.6 mm away from the planned osteotomy site. The navigated cuts were significantly more accurate (p ≤ 0.01). In the cadaver study, navigated entry and exit cuts were 1.5 ± 0.9 mm and 2.1 ± 1.5 mm from the planned cuts. The variation among three different users was 1 mm on both the entry and exit cuts. CONCLUSIONS: Navigation to guide pelvic bone cuts is accurate and feasible. Three-dimensional radiographs should be used for improved accuracy. Navigated cuts were significantly more accurate than non-navigated cuts were. A margin of 5 mm between the target tumor volume and the planned cut plane would result in a negative margin resection in more than 95% of the cuts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The accuracy of pelvic bone tumor resections and pelvic osteotomies can be improved with navigation to within 5 mm of the planned cut.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.227 · 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