Prevalence and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Reintubation After Anterior Cervical Spine Surgery: Results From the AOSpine North America Multicenter Study on 8887 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with reintubation after anterior cervical spine surgery. METHODS: A total of 8887 patients undergoing anterior cervical spine surgery were enrolled in the AOSpine North America Rare Complications of Cervical Spine Surgery study. Patients with or without complications after surgery were included. Demographic and surgical information were collected for patients with reintubation. Patients were evaluated using a variety of assessment tools, including the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scale, Nurick score, Neck Disability Index, and Short Form-36 Health Survey. RESULTS: Nine cases of postoperative reintubation were identified. The total prevalence of this complication was 0.10% and ranged from 0% to 0.59% across participating institutions. The time to development of airway symptoms after surgery was within 24 hours in 6 patients and between 5 and 7 days in 3 patients. Although 8 patients recovered, 1 patient died. At final follow-up, patients with reintubation did not exhibit significant and meaningful improvements in pain, functional status, or quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Although the prevalence of reintubation was very low, this complication was associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Clinicians should identify their high-risk patients and carefully observe them for up to 2 weeks after 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".