Medical and surgical management of acute spinal injury during pregnancy: A case series in a third-world country
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is scant literature describing the management of acute spinal injury in pregnant patients. Here, we report our experience with five cases of pregnant patients including three females who suffered acute traumatic spinal cord injuries (SCIs). METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated five pregnant women presenting with traumatic spinal injuries over a 16-month period. All were assessed using the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury Patients and the American Spine Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS). RESULTS: Three patients sustained SCIs: two cervical spine (C4 AIS-A and C5 AIS-B) and one thoracolumbar junction fracture dislocation (T11 AIS-A). Two patients required surgical stabilization during pregnancy, with one undergoing surgery after delivery. All three patients subsequently delivered healthy newborns. The remaining two patients without neurologic deficits at admission were treated conservatively; one had a healthy child, whereas the other patient aborted the baby due to the initial trauma. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the same surgical principals may be applied to pregnant women as to routine patients with SCIs. Further studies with greater patient data should be performed to better develop significant guidelines for the management of pregnant patients with spinal injuries.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".