MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918038323 · doi:10.1097/bsd.0000000000000795

Optical Topographic Imaging for Spinal Intraoperative 3-Dimensional Navigation in the Cervical Spine

2019· article· en· W2918038323 on OpenAlexaff
Daipayan Guha, Raphael Jakubovic, Naif M. Alotaibi, Ryan Deorajh, Shaurya Gupta, Michael G. Fehlings, Todd G. Mainprize, Albert Yee, Victor X. D. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Spine Surgery A Spine Publication · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmSagittal planeMedicineNuclear medicineCervical vertebraeNavigation systemRadiologySurgeryComputer scienceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OF BACKGROUND DATA: Computer-assisted 3-dimensional navigation may guide spinal instrumentation. Optical topographic imaging (OTI) is a novel navigation technique offering comparable accuracy and significantly faster registration workflow relative to current navigation systems. It has previously been validated in open posterior thoracolumbar exposures. OBJECTIVE: To validate the utility and accuracy of OTI in the cervical spine. STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective preclinical cadaveric and clinical cohort study. METHODS: Standard midline open posterior cervical exposures were performed, with segmental OTI registration at each vertebral level. In cadaveric testing, OTI navigation guidance was used to track a drill guide for cannulating screw tracts in the lateral mass at C1, pars at C2, lateral mass at C3-6, and pedicle at C7. In clinical testing, translaminar screws at C2 were also analyzed in addition. Planned navigation trajectories were compared with screw positions on postoperative computed tomographic imaging, and quantitative navigation accuracies, in the form of absolute translational and angular deviations, were computed. RESULTS: In cadaveric testing (mean±SD) axial and sagittal translational navigation errors were (1.66±1.18 mm) and (2.08±2.21 mm), whereas axial and sagittal angular errors were (4.11±3.79 degrees) and (6.96±5.40 degrees), respectively.In clinical validation (mean±SD) axial and sagittal translational errors were (1.92±1.37 mm) and (1.27±0.97 mm), whereas axial and sagittal angular errors were (3.68±2.59 degrees) and (3.47±2.93 degrees), respectively. These results are comparable to those achieved with OTI in open thoracolumbar approaches, as well as using current spinal neuronavigation systems in similar applications. There was no radiographic facet, canal or foraminal violations, nor any neurovascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: OTI is a novel navigation technique allowing efficient initial and repeat registration. Accuracy even in the more mobile cervical spine is comparable to current spinal neuronavigation systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Spine Surgery A Spine PublicationSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207