An Analysis of the Incidence and Outcomes of Major Versus Minor Neurological Decline After Complex Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A subanalysis from a prospective, multicenter, international cohort study in 15 sites (Scoli-RISK-1). OBJECTIVE: To report detailed information regarding the severity of neurological decline related to complex adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery and to examine outcomes based on severity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Postoperative neurological decline after ASD surgeries can occur due to nerve root(s) or spinal cord dysfunction. The impact of decline and the pattern of recovery may be related to the anatomic location and the severity of the injury. METHODS: An investigation of 272 prospectively enrolled complex ASD surgical patients with neurological status measured by American Spinal Injury Association Lower Extremity Motor Scores (LEMS) was undertaken. Postoperative neurological decline was categorized into "major" (≥5 points loss) versus "minor" (<5 points loss) deficits. Timing and extent of recovery in LEMS were investigated for each group. RESULTS: Among the 265 patients with LEMS available at discharge, 61 patients (23%) had neurological decline, with 20 (33%) experiencing major decline. Of note, 90% of the patients with major decline had deficits in three or more myotomes. Full recovery was seen in 24% at 6 weeks and increased to 65% at 6 months. However, 34% continued to experience some neurological decline at 24 months, with 6% demonstrating no improvement. Of 41 patients (67%) with minor decline, 73% had deficits in one or two myotomes. Full recovery was seen in 49% at 6 weeks and increased to 70% at 6 months. Of note, 26% had persistence of some neurological deficit at 24 months, with 18% demonstrating no recovery. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing complex ASD correction, a rate of postoperative neurological decline of 23% was noted with 33% of these being "major." Although most patients showed substantial recovery by 6 months, approximately one-third continued to experience neurological dysfunction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".