Changing the Adverse Event Profile in Metastatic Spine Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors and preventive methods for wound complications and instrumentation failure after metastatic spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: We focused on two postoperative complications of metastatic spine tumor surgery: wound complications and instrumentation failure and preventive measures. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature from 1980 to 2015. The articles were analyzed for the presence of documented infection and/or wound complications and instrumentation failure. RESULTS: Forty articles met our inclusion criteria for wound complications and prevention. There is very low level of evidence that preoperative radiation, preoperative neurological deficit, revision procedures, and posterior approaches can contribute to wound complications (infections, wound dehiscence). There is very low level of evidence that plastic surgery soft tissue reconstruction, intrawound vancomycin powder, and percutaneous pedicle screws may prevent postoperative wound complications. Fourteen articles met our inclusion criteria for instrumentation failure. There is very low level of evidence that constructs greater than six levels, positive sagittal balance, preoperative radiation, and history of chest wall resection can contribute to implant failures. CONCLUSION: • For patients undergoing revision metastatic spine tumor surgery, plastic surgery should perform the soft tissue reconstruction (strong recommendation/very low quality of evidence).• For patients undergoing metastatic spine tumor surgery, plastic surgery may perform immediate soft tissue reconstruction (weak recommendation/very low quality of evidence).• For patients undergoing metastatic spine tumor surgery, intrawound vancomycin can be applied to decrease the risk of postoperative wound infections (weak recommendation/very low quality of evidence).• For patients undergoing metastatic spine tumor surgery, percutaneous pedicle screws can be placed to decrease the risk of postoperative wound complications (weak recommendation/very low quality of evidence).• Instrumentation failure risk factors include constructs greater than six levels, positive sagittal balance, preoperative radiation, and history of chest wall resections (weak recommendation/very low quality of evidence). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".