DIFFERENCES IN EMG STIMULATION THRESHOLDS AT THE APICAL PEDICLE IN PAEDIATRIC SPINE DEFORMITY CORRECTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of operative technology has allowed correction of complex spinal deformities. Neurological deficits following spinal instrumentation is a devastating complication and the risk is especially high in those with complex sagittal and coronal plane deformities. Prior to intraoperative evoked potential monitoring, spinal cord function was tested using the Stagnara Wake up test, typically performed after instrumentation once the desired correction has been achieved. This test is limited as it does not reflect the timeframe in which the problem occurred and it may be dangerous to some patients. Intraoperative neuromonitoring allows timely feedback of the effect of instrumentation and curve correction on the spinal cord. Pedicle screws that are malpositioned can result in poor fixation or neuronal injury. Evoked EMG monitoring can aid in accurate placement. A positive EMG response can alert the surgeon to a potential pedicle breech and allow them to reassess the placement of their hardware intraoperatively. The stimulation threshold is affected by the amount of surrounding bone acting as an insulator to electrical conduction and is variable in different regions of the spine. In the non-deformed, lumbar spine stimulation thresholds have been established. Such guidelines have not been well-developed for the thoracic spine, or for severely scoliotic spines. Thus our primary objective was to compare the stimulation threshold of the apical pedicle on the concave side to the stimulation threshold of the pedicles at the upper and lower instrumented levels. Intraoperative EMG stimulation thresholds were done at 192 apical pedicles on the concave side of the deformity and then compared to those thresholds found at 169 terminal level pedicles. Only pedicles for which a stimulation threshold was found were reported and excluded those where a breech was suspected. The lowest stimulation required for an EMG response was documented to a maximum stimulation of 20 mA. The mean threshold at the apex was 16.62 milliamps (mA) compared to 18.25mA at the terminal levels. This was compared with the t-test and showed a statistically significant difference (p In this study we report only the thresholds for the concave side, the pedicle that is most likely to be reduced in size. The threshold for stimulation is reduced compared to those seen at the highest and lowest instrumented level. Most of the apexes are located in the mid-thoracic spine with the highest instrumented levels being in the high thoracic spine and the lowest levels being in the lumbar spine. This study provides preliminary evidence that the apical, concave pedicle has a lower threshold than the end pedicles and one cannot rely on established thresholds from different areas of the spine. The surgeon should be cognisant of these differences when instrumenting at the apical level. Ongoing work is examining the convex apex threshold as well as the relationship between the effect of age and a diagnosis other than adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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; 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".