MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337018860 · doi:10.1055/s-0035-1554380

Intraoperative Cone Beam CT (O-Arm) and Stereotactic Navigation (StealthStation) System in Complex Adult Spine Surgery: Early Experience and Learning Curve

2015· article· en· W2337018860 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Contreras, Juliet Batke, Nicolas Dea, Marcel F. Dvorak, Charles G. Fisher, John Street

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Spine Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Spine Surgery Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood lossSurgeryIncidence (geometry)Learning curve

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Computer-assisted navigation and intraoperative imaging systems have been shown to improve pedicle screw accuracy in a variety of instrumented spine surgeries. There is limited data evaluating the clinical learning curve for surgeons and its relationship to patient outcomes when using intraoperative navigation and imaging systems. We examined the clinical learning curve and patient outcomes of using O-Arm and StealthStation for six fellowship-trained spine surgeons at our institution, a single quaternary referral center, from 2009 to 2013. Materials and Methods This ambispective study examined 231 surgical cases where O-arm and StealthStation were used to facilitate pedicle instrumentation. The learning curve was determined by examining the year-by-year total operative time and blood loss, operative time and blood loss per surgical level, and the incidence of surgery-related adverse events. Adverse events were prospectively collected using the spine adverse events severity system (SAVES). Results O-arm and StealthStation were acquired at our institution in late 2008 and all spine surgeons were using this navigation system by the beginning of 2009. A total of 231 patients had screws placed using the O-arm and StealthStation between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2012. There were 430 screws placed in 27 cases in 2009, 556 screws in 54 cases in 2010, 674 screws in 59 cases in 2011, and 758 screws in 75 cases in 2012, p < 0.05. The average estimated blood loss (EBL) decreased from 1,229 mL in 2009 to 907 mL in 2012, p < 0.05. The EBL per case per number of levels instrumented decreased from 5.72 mL in 2008 to 2.39 mL in 2012, p < 0.05. Mean operating time decreased from 407 minutes to 378 minutes from 2009 to 2012, p < 0.05. The number of misplaced screws per case decreased from 0.78 to 0.54 from 2009 to 2012, p < 0.05. There were no significant differences in incidences of dural tear, surgical site infection, or other surgical adverse events during the study period. Conclusion Our results demonstrate that there is a learning curve to the use of intraoperative CT-based navigation, as measured by OR time, intraoperative blood loss, and screw malposition. There were no significant differences in surgical adverse events during this learning period.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.329
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Spine JournalSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207