MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112305691 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003858

In-hospital Course and Complications of Laminectomy Alone Versus Laminectomy Plus Instrumented Posterolateral Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

2020· article· en· W3112305691 on OpenAlexaff
Jetan H. Badhiwala, Sean N. Leung, Fan Jiang, Jamie Wilson, Muhammad Akbar, Farshad Nassiri, Christopher D. Witiw, Jefferson R. Wilson, Michael G. Fehlings

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLaminectomySurgerySpondylolisthesisLumbarRetrospective cohort studySpinal fusionOdds ratioComplicationBlood transfusionInternal medicineSpinal cord

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the short-term outcomes of laminectomy with/without fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Lumbar DS is a common cause of low back and radicular pain. Controversy remains over the safety and efficacy of fusion in addition to standard decompressive surgery. METHODS: Patients with lumbar DS who underwent laminectomy alone or laminectomy plus posterolateral fusion at a single level were identified from the 2012-2017 NSQIP database. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, major complication, reoperation, readmission, as well as operative duration, need for blood transfusion, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination. Outcomes were compared between treatment groups by multivariable regression, adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities (modified Frailty Index). Effect sizes were reported by adjusted odds ratio (aOR) or mean difference (aMD). RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 1804 patients; of these, 802 underwent laminectomy alone and 1002 laminectomy plus fusion. On both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, there was no difference in 30-day mortality, major complications, reoperation, or readmission. However, laminectomy plus fusion was associated with longer operative time (170.0 vs. 152.7 minutes; aMD 16.00 minutes, P < 0.001), longer hospital LOS (3.2 vs. 2.5 days; aMD 0.68, P < 0.001), more frequent need for intra- or postoperative blood transfusion (6.8% vs. 3.1%; aOR 2.24, P = 0.001), and less frequent discharge home (80.7% vs. 89.2%; aOR 0.46, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We found single-level laminectomy plus fusion for lumbar DS to have a comparable short-term safety profile to laminectomy alone. However, fusion was associated with longer operative time and LOS, higher risk of blood transfusion, and greater need for inpatient rehabilitation. These factors should be recognized by clinicians and discussed with patients in the context of their values when weighing surgical treatment of lumbar DS.Level of Evidence: 3.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207