Two window-minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery (new approach) has a better post operative outcome and less soft tissue damage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this new approach is to develop a method that is less invasive as well as less traumatic and can provide a better exposure/view of the surgical field. Postoperatively, the patient has less pain, short hospital stay and less use of the postoperative pain control medications. As compared to other minimally invasive spine surgeries this approach results in less soft tissue damage, minimal muscle destruction, less retraction and better surgical outcome. METHODS: In this article authors focus on the new approach that has cost effective benefits as well as short recovery time postoperatively. RESULTS: Approach is applicable for severe spinal stenosis as compared to other Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (MISS) techniques that are only applicable for the mild to moderate stenosis or degenerative processes. This plane is avascular plane so no or less bleeding is anticipated from this procedure. CONCLUSION: The technique facilitates bilateral canal enlargement through unilateral approach and provides accessibility to the contralateral foramen for decompression with perfect exposure and allows instrumentation through the lateral window with no muscle destruction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".