Etiology of Pseudarthrosis in Ankylosing Spondylitis: What Is the Main Cause?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the well-known complications in advanced ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is the development of Andersson lesion (AL)1. Subsequently, various reports with conflicting terminology appeared in the literature. Spondylodiskitis , which implies inflammatory etiology, was used by some authors2,3,4. Others have used the terms destructive vertebral lesion 5,6,7,8 or spinal pseudarthrosis 9,10. The terminological diversity alludes to the varied purported etiologies surrounding AL. The etiologies of extensive AL have been well documented in literature. Various etiologies for the development of AL in patients with AS have been postulated, including infection, inflammation, and trauma. Current consensus is that infection is no longer considered a cause of the AL, because of the lack of positive culture results. Subsequently, etiology of the AL has been open to an ongoing debate between inflammation and trauma. AS is characterized by spinal inflammation, and it is not surprising that many authors have focused on the inflammatory etiology of AL. Anterior spondylitis such as Romanus lesion comprised marginal erosion of the anterior vertebral corners related to inflammation of the attachment sites of anterior annulus fibrosus (AF) and anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) in patients with AS8. The erosion becomes enclosed by a sclerotic rim and further healing results in the formation of syndesmophytes, finally resulting in a complete ankylosed segment. It has been postulated that AL might be exceptional extensions of this inflammatory process3,8,11,12. … Address correspondence to Dr. S. Lee, Department of Radiology, Hanyang University Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, 17 Haengdang-Dong, Seongdong-Gu, Seoul 133-792, Republic of Korea. E-mail: radsh{at}hanyang.ac.kr
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".