Long-term outcome of anterior decompression and spinal fixation after placement of the Wellesley Wedge for thoracic and lumbar spinal metastasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The authors assessed the long-term results of anterior decompressive and vertebral body reconstructive surgery in which the Wellesley Wedge was applied in patients with metastatic spinal lesions over the life span of these individuals. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of the outcome of 27 consecutively treated patients who underwent surgery for thoracic or lumbar spine metastases. Decompressive surgery was performed via an anterior thoracotomy and/or retroperitoneal approach depending on the level of the lesion. The spine was reconstructed using a U-shaped plate with an interposed methylmethacrylate strut known as the Wellesley Wedge. RESULTS: Thirty percent of patients suffered medical complications whereas 22% experienced postoperative improvement, as reflected by an improved Frankel grade. Used in patients with a variety of primary tumor types, a spectrum of ages and neurological status, and extensive preoperative osseous spinal involvement and deformity, the Wellesley Wedge resulted in spinal stability for the duration of patients' lives in 92%. CONCLUSIONS: In this series the patient selection process for surgery was a challenge yet to be solved; however, considering the durability of the Wellesley Wedge itself, the authors will continue to use it in selected patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".