Non-neurologic adverse events after complex adult spinal deformity surgery: results from the prospective, multicenter Scoli-RISK-1 study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Accurate information regarding the expected complications of complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) is important for shared decision making and informed consent. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the rate and types of non-neurologic adverse events after complex ASD surgeries, and to identify risk factors that affect their occurrence. METHODS: The details and occurrence of all non-neurologic adverse events were reviewed in a prospective cohort of 272 patients after complex ASD surgical correction in a mulitcentre database of the Scoli-RISK-1 study with a planned follow-up of 2 years. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify potential risk factors for non-neurologic adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 272 patients, 184 experienced a total of 515 non-neurologic adverse events for an incidence of 67.6%. 121 (44.5%) patients suffered from more than one adverse event. The most frequent non-neurologic adverse events were surgically related (27.6%), of which implant failure and dural tear were most common. In the unadjusted analyses, significant factors for non-neurologic adverse events were age, previous spine surgery performed, number of documented non-neurologic comorbidities and ASA grade. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, previous spine surgery was the only independent risk factor for non-neurologic adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of non-neurologic adverse events for patients undergoing corrective surgeries for ASD was 67.6%. Previous spinal surgery was the only independent risk factor predicting the occurrence of non-neurologic adverse events. These findings complement the earlier report of neurologic complications after ASD surgeries from the Scoli-RISK-1 study. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".