MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597037680 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000002038

The Use of Intraoperative CT and Navigation for the Treatment of Spinal Deformity in Open and Minimally Invasive Surgery

2017· review· en· W2597037680 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph R. O’Brien

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFluoroscopySpinal deformitySpinal surgerySupine positionInstrumentation (computer programming)SurgeryDeformityRadiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in the use of in-operating room computed tomography (CT) scanning have enhanced the usability of navigation in spinal surgery. Presurgical advanced imaging studies had limited accuracy because of changes in spinal position from supine to prone, making early efforts at spinal navigation cumbersome and inaccurate. In-room scanning with patient-based markers has enhanced the accuracy of navigated spinal instrumentation and of robot-guided spinal instrumentation. Both may be used in open and minimally invasive complex spinal deformity and revision surgeries to enhance the accuracy of spinal instrumentation and to decrease reoperation due to screw malposition. Intraoperative navigation can result in net cost savings to a hospital system and increased radiation safety for hospital personnel. The accuracy of pedicle screw placement depends on the experience of the surgeon and the method used. Published rates of accuracy hold thoracolumbar freehand screw placement at 72% to 94%.1 Use of fluoroscopy may increase accuracy to 84% to 94%.2 It is important to note that not all malpositioned pedicle screws require revision surgery, and published rates of revision range from 2% to 8%.3 Even with such low rates, such revisions, on average, cost the health care system $23,762.3 In the aggregate, such costs are undesirable, as are potential complications such as dural tear or neurologic injury. Busy spine centers may consider the utility of intraoperative CT scanning for screw checking or three-dimensional navigation to improve the accuracy of spinal instrumentation. Intraoperative CT scanning and associated navigation tools have evolved over the past 10 years with improved accuracy. In part, acceptance of navigation has lagged as the result of work flow in the operating room and time constraints. Additionally, intraoperative CT scanning in the prone position has enhanced the accuracy of navigation over preoperative scans, which are obtained supine. Modern intraoperative navigation and robot-assisted navigation can enhance surgical accuracy and improve the safety profile of complex spinal surgery (Figure 1).Figure 1: Navigation in minimally invasive spine surgery. Marker placement at T10 for percutaneous L1-pelvis surgery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207