Selective dorsal rhizotomy: an illustrated review of operative techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) is a procedure primarily performed to improve function in a subset of children with limitations related to spasticity. There is substantial variability in operative techniques among centers and surgeons. Here, the authors provide a technical review of operative approaches for SDR. METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed databases were queried in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. All studies included described a novel surgical technique. The technical nuances of each approach were extracted, including extent of exposure, bone removal, and selection of appropriate nerve roots. The operative approach preferred at the authors' institution (the "2 × 3 exposure") is also detailed. RESULTS: Five full-text papers were identified from a total of 380 articles. Operative approaches to SDR varied significantly with regard to level of exposure, extent of laminectomy, and identification of nerve roots. The largest exposure involved a multilevel laminectomy, while the smallest exposure involved a keyhole interlaminar approach. At the Hospital for Sick Children, the authors utilize a two-level laminoplasty at the level of the conus medullaris. The benefits and disadvantages of the spectrum of techniques are discussed, and illustrative figures are provided. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical approaches to SDR vary considerably and are detailed and illustrated in this review as a guide for neurosurgeons. Future studies should address the long-term impact of these techniques on functional outcomes and complications such as spinal deformity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".