Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak after Repair of Congenital Spinal Pathologies, Incidence and Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To know the incidence of CSF leak and role of tincture benzoyl in the management of CSF leak after the repair of congenital spinal deformities like myelomeningocele, meningocele and tethered cord syndrome.Materials and Methods: All patients who were operated for congenital spinal surgeries in the form of MMC, Meningocele and TCS by a single surgeon were followed for a minimum of 3 months. Patients with already CSF leak/ruptured MMC prior to surgery were not part of the study. The particulars like gender and type of surgery, days since first surgery, associated infection, hydrocephalus and type of management were noted on a proforma.Results: A total of 73 patients with spinal dysraphism were operated during the study period and of them about 13 patients returned with problems of the CSF leak. The mean duration and duration since the CSF leak was from 6 days to 16 days. Among them, 10 patients had an MMC repair and one patient had TCS release, while 2 patients were having meningocele repair. The patients were stitched and one patient was re-operated two times for repair of CSF leak. Two patients had a CSF leak along with post op signs of HCP that settled by placing a shunt along with primary repair of the wound reinforced with tincture benzoyl in a single setting. Conclusion: CSF leak is a common complication following repair of spinal dysraphism and most patients can be managed with the application of tincture benzoyl alone or after simple skin reinforcement.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".