Novel Angular Measures of Cervical Deformity Account for Upper Cervical Compensation and Sagittal Alignment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of a prospective multicenter database. OBJECTIVE: This study introduces 2 new cervical alignment measures accounting for both cervical deformity (CD) and upper cervical compensation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Current descriptions of CD like the C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) do not account for compensatory mechanisms such as C0-C2 lordosis and pelvic tilt, which makes surgical planning difficult. The craniocervical angle (CCA) combines the slope of McGregor's line and the inclination from C7 to the hard palate. The C2-pelvic tilt (CPT) combines C2 tilt and pelvic tilt. Like the T1 pelvic angle, CPT is less affected by lower extremity and pelvic compensation. METHODS: Novel and existing CD measures were correlated in 781 patients from a thoracolumbar deformity (TLD) database and 61 patients from a prospective CD database. CD patients were subanalyzed by region of deformity driver: cervical or cervico-thoracic junction. TLD patients were substratified according to whether or not they had CD as well, where CD was defined as cSVA>4 cm or T1 slope minus cervical lordosis mismatch (TS-CL) >20. RESULTS: TLD cohort: mean cSVA was 31.7±17.8 mm. Subanalysis of TLD patients with CD versus no-CD demonstrated significant differences in CCA (56.2 vs. 60.6, P<0.001) and CPT (32.6 vs. 19.3, P<0.001). CCA and CPT correlated with cSVA (r=-0.488/r=0.418, P<0.001) and C0-C2 lordosis (r=-0.630/r=0.289,P<0.001). CD cohort: mean cSVA was 47.3±32.2 mm. CCA and CPT correlated with cSVA (r=-0.811/r=0.657, P<0.001) and C0-C2 lordosis (r=-0.656/r=0.610, P<0.001). CD cohort subanalysis indicated that CT patients were significantly more deformed by cSVA (71.3 vs 24.0 mm, P<0.001), CCA (47.1 vs 59.1 degrees, P<0.001), and CPT (63.3 vs 43.8 degrees, P=0.002). Using linear regression analysis, cSVA of 4 cm corresponded to CCA of 53.2 degrees (r=0.5) and CPT of 48.5 degrees (r=0.4). CONCLUSIONS: CCA and CPT account for both cervical sagittal alignment and upper cervical compensation and can be utilized in assessment of cervical alignment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".