P.134 Spinal epidural abscess associated with septic facet joints-one center experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Infection to the facet joints has been reported sporadically but the significance of this type of infection has not been clarified. In our study on spine infection, we identified the cases of spinal epidural abscess with septic joints and was able to compare to cases of epidural abscess with discitis and osteomyelitis. Methods: Between 2007 and 2014, we experienced 176 cases of spine infection including discitis, osteomyelitis and epidural abscess. Retrospective review of the clinical data and radiological findings was performed. Among 176 cases, 80 patients had epidural abscess. They were divided to two groups, one with septic joint and the other with discitis and osteomyelitis. Results: 23 patients were found to have septic joints with epidural abscess based on the MRI findings. Mean age was 45.5. 15 of 23 patients (65%) required surgery and all treated with laminectomy. 78% had a good neurological outcome. 57 patients had epidural abscess with discitis and osteomyelitis. Mean age was 54. 51% required surgery. Only 62 % was treated with laminectomy alone. Good neurological outcome was seen in 67% of the patients. Conclusions: Infected facet joints are not as rare as generally believed. The patients with septic joints are younger. Surgery was done more often and laminectomy provided better neurological outcome
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".