MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317854198 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000000106

Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Silicate-Substituted Calcium Phosphate Versus rhBMP-2 in a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

2013· article· en· W2317854198 on OpenAlexaff
Sreeharsha V. Nandyala, Alejandro Marquez‐Lara, Steven J. Fineberg, Miguel A. Pelton, Kern Singh

Post-publication record

NatureRetraction
ReasonError by Third Party;Error in Methods;Error in Text;Miscommunication with/by Third Party;
Date3/1/2016 0:00
Flagged by OpenAlex?Yes

Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryArthrodesisPseudarthrosisRandomized controlled trialVisual analogue scaleCohortLumbarOrthopedic surgeryProspective cohort studySpinal fusionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare arthrodesis rates between patients undergoing a primary single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) with either Actifuse or recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Preclinical animal studies suggest that silicate-substituted calcium phosphate (Actifuse) bone graft substitute offers equivalent or an increased fusion rate compared with other graft enhancers/extenders and rhBMP-2. METHODS: Fifty-two patients undergoing a single-level unilateral MIS TLIF were evenly randomized into 2 cohorts as follows: the Actifuse cohort received Actifuse combined with 5 mL of bone marrow aspirate (n = 26; 50%), whereas the rhBMP cohort received 4.2 mg of rhBMP-2 (n = 26; 50%). A pre hoc G*Power analysis yielded a sample size of n = 26 that was determined through a 2-tailed distribution calculation. Computed tomographic analysis was performed at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative visual analogue scale scores were obtained to assess the clinical outcomes. Arthrodesis was determined by 2 separate, blinded orthopedic surgeons and a board certified radiologist. RESULTS: At 1-year follow-up, 65% (17/26) of the Actifuse cohort and 92% (24/26) of the rhBMP-2 cohort demonstrated a radiographical arthrodesis (P = 0.01). In both study cohorts, the 1-year postoperative visual analogue scale scores significantly improved (P < 0.001). Pseudarthrosis rates at 1 year were 35.0% (9/26) and 7.7% (2/26) for the Actifuse and rhBMP-2 groups, respectively (P = 0.01, OR = 6.35, 95% CI = 1.22-33.1). A greater reoperation rate was noted in the Actifuse cohort (35.0%, 9/26) compared with the BMP-2 cohort (7.7%, 2/26; P = 0.01). One patient with BMP-2 also experienced symptomatic neuroforaminal bone growth (3.8%, n = 1/26). CONCLUSION: Silicate-substituted calcium phosphate was associated with a significantly lower rate of arthrodesis than rhBMP-2 in a MIS TLIF. The patients with pseudarthrosis in both cohorts were all clinically symptomatic with an unimproved visual analogue scale score. Additional analysis of Actifuse and other graft enhancers/extenders are needed prior to the utilization for an MIS TLIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207