MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545877371

190. COMPARATIVE STABILITY OF TWO C1-C2 TRANSARTICULAR SCREW SALVAGING FIXATION TECHNIQUES

2011· article· en· W2545877371 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hossein Elgafy, Tejaswy Potluri, Ahmad Faizan, Scot Foster, Nikhil Kulkarni, Amanesh Goyal, Goel Vijay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVertebral arteryFixation (population genetics)AnatomyVertebraCervical spineOrthodonticsMaterials scienceMedicineSurgeryPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The current gold-standard for atlanto-axial fixation is C1-C2 Transarticular Screw (TS) fixation. In certain cases, the complicated nature of vertebral artery injury could make the application of bilateral transar-ticular screws impossible. This study biomechanically compares three atlantoaxial transarticular salvaging fixation techniques. Method: Nine Fresh ligamentous human cervical spine specimens (C0-C4) were thawed and the tissue surrounding the spine, except the ligaments and discs, was carefully removed. Pure moments were applied to skull in increments of 0.5 Nm from 0 Nm to 2.0 Nm with the help of loading arms, nylon strings and pulleys. The specimens were tested in extension (EXT), flexion (FLEX), left lateral bending (LB), right lateral bending (RB), left axial rotation (LR) and right axial rotation (RR) for all the cases. The positions of the LEDs were recorded using an Optotrak Motion Measurement System (Northern Digital, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada) and was converted into three rotations (flexion/extension, lateral bending and axial rotation) using rigid body kinematic principles in relation to the fixed base. The specimens were tested intact and after type II odontoid fracture, were instrumented and tested with three fixation constructs: C1-C2 TS on right side and C1LMS-C2PS on contralateral side C1-C2 TS on right side and C1LMS-C2IL on the contralateral side and C1-C2 TS on right side with sublaminar wire. Results: All of the three instrumented cases significantly reduced motion across C1-C2 segment in all the modes when compared to intact (P 0.05). TS+C1LM+C2IL is significantly stiffer than TS+Wire in axial rotation (P Conclusion: This study showed that TS+C1LMS+C2PS fixation is equivalent to TS+C1LMS+C2ILS fixation in all the rotation modes and superior to TS+Wire fixation in axial rotation averaged over all ranges of motion. Also, TS+C1LMS+C2ILS fixation is superior to TS+Wire fixation in axial rotation averaged over all ranges of motion.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207