MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319271021 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000001026

Safety and Efficacy of Reconstruction of Complex Cervical Spine Pathology Using Pedicle Screws Inserted with Stealth Navigation and 3D Image-Guided (O-Arm) Technology

2015· article· en· W2319271021 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander A. Theologis, Shane Burch

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurovascular bundleSurgeryCervical vertebraeStenosisNeck painFixation (population genetics)Cervical spineRetrospective cohort studyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. OBJECTIVE: To determine safety and efficacy of cervical pedicle screw placement using O-Arm and Stealth Navigation in patients with cervicothoracic spinal deformities and revision subaxial cervical pathology. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical pedicle screws are biomechanically advantageous to other posterior cervical fixation techniques; however, their use is limited by concerns for neurovascular injury. Few clinical reports exist on their placement safety and efficacy using modern navigation systems. METHODS: Adults who had cervical pedicle screws inserted using O-Arm and Stealth Navigation between November 2007 and January 2014 and with a minimum 1-year follow-up were retrospectively studied. Screw insertion safety, surgical complications, need for reoperation, and clinical outcomes [Neck Disability Index, EQ-5D, numeric pain rating scales] were evaluated. RESULTS: 21 patients (female-10; male-11; average age 63 yr [32-83 yr]) met inclusion criteria. Average follow-up was 29.8 months (12-81.6 mo). Reconstruction of C2 and the subaxial cervical spine included 8 primary operations for cervicothoracic kyphosis and 13 revision operations. 121 pedicle screws were placed (C2: 4, C3: 20, C4: 22, C5: 23, C6: 18, C7: 34) using Stealth Navigation. The average number of screws placed per case was 6 (1-12). Greater than 99% of screws were placed safely without neurovascular injury. 1 screw (0.8%) was noted postoperatively to critically breach the medial wall and was associated with an acute C5 nerve root palsy. 2 patients required revisions for postoperative iatrogenic foraminal stenosis and associated C8 radiculopathies. No vascular complications due to aberrant screw placement occurred. There were significant improvements (P < 0.05) in EQ-5D utility scores and neck and arm pain. Neck Disability Index scores decreased on average by 10 points (P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Placement of cervical pedicle screws using O-Arm/Stealth Navigation in this series was a safe and effective method for posterior stabilization in cervicothoracic deformity and revision operations of the subaxial cervical spine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations54
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207