Prevalence of Klippel-Feil Syndrome in a Surgical Series of Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Analysis of the Prospective, Multicenter AOSpine North America Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Design Prospective study. Objective To evaluate the prevalence of Klippel-Feil syndrome (KFS) in a prospective data set of patients undergoing surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and to evaluate if magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features in patients with KFS are more pronounced than those of non-KFS patients with CSM. Methods A retrospective analysis of baseline MRI data from the AOSpine prospective and multicenter CSM-North American study was conducted. All the patients presented with at least one clinical sign of myelopathy and underwent decompression surgery. The MRIs and radiographs were reviewed by three investigators. The clinical and imaging findings were compared with patients without KFS but with CSM. Results Imaging analysis discovered 5 of 131 patients with CSM (∼3.82%) had single-level congenital fusion of the cervical spine. The site of fusion differed for all the patients. One patient underwent posterior surgery and four patients received anterior surgery. Postoperative follow-up was available for four of the five patients with KFS and indicated stable or improved functional status. All five patients demonstrated pathologic changes of adjacent segments and hyperintensity signal changes in the spinal cord on T2-weighted MRI. Multiple MRI features, most notably maximum canal compromise (p = 0.05) and T2 signal hyperintensity area (p = 0.05), were worse in patients with CSM and KFS. Conclusions The high prevalence of KFS in our surgical series of patients with CSM may serve as an indication that these patients are prone to increased biomechanical use of segments adjacent to fused vertebra. This supposition is supported by a tendency of patients with KFS to present with more extensive MRI evidence of degeneration than non-KFS patients with CSM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".