MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603157203 · doi:10.1097/bpo.0000000000000976

Patients Without Intraoperative Neuromonitoring (IONM) Alerts During VEPTR Implantation Did Not Sustain Neurological Injury During Subsequent Routine Expansions: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

2017· article· en· W2603157203 on OpenAlexaff
Jaren LaGreca, Tara Flynn, Patrick J. Cahill, Amer F. Samdani, Michael G. Vitale, Ron El‐Hawary, John T. Smith, Jonathan H. Phillips, John M. Flynn, Michael Glotzbecker, Sumeet Garg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic Effects
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyImplantMedical record

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of intraoperative neurological monitoring (IONM) alerts and neurological injury during vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib (VEPTR) treatment and evaluate the utility of IONM during VEPTR expansion procedures in patients who have not previously had neurological injury or IONM alerts. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, VEPTR procedures and IONM records were reviewed at 17 institutions for patients treated with VEPTR from 2005 to 2011. All consecutive cases in patients with minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients with prior history of growing rods or other invasive spine-based surgical treatment were excluded. Surgeries were categorized into implant, revision, expansion, and removal procedures. Cases with IONM alerts or neurological injury had additional detailed review. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. RESULTS: In total, 2355 consecutive VEPTR procedures (352 patients) consisting of 299 implant, 377 revision, 1587 expansion, and 92 removal procedures were included. In total, 620 VEPTR procedures had IONM, and 539 of those had IONM records available for review. IONM alerts occurred in 9/539 procedures (1.7%): 3/192 implants (1.6%), 3/58 revisions (5.2%), and 3/258 expansions (1.2%). New neurological injury occurred in 3/2355 procedures (0.1%), 3/352 patients (0.9%). All 3 injuries were in implant procedures, only 1 had an IONM alert. All 3 had upper extremity motor deficits (1 had sensory deficit also). All had full recovery at 17, 30, and 124 days postinjury. One patient without prior neurological injury or IONM alert had an IONM alert during expansion that resolved after an increase in blood pressure. The remaining IONM alerts during expansions were all in children with prior IONM alerts during implant, revision, or exchange procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The highest rate of neurological injury in VEPTR surgery was found for implant procedures. There were no instances of neurological injury during VEPTR expansion, revision, or removal procedures. IONM did not identify new neurological injuries in patients undergoing VEPTR expansion who did not previously have a history of IONM signal change or neurologic injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-diagnostic study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric OrthopaedicsSame topicIntraoperative Neuromonitoring and Anesthetic EffectsFrench-language works237,207