MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203530267 · doi:10.3171/case21211

Atlantoaxial wiring hardware failure resulting in intracranial hemorrhage and hydrocephalus: illustrative case

2021· article· en· W3203530267 on OpenAlexaff
Anass Benomar, Harrison J. Westwick, Sami Obaïd, A. Nzokou, Sung-Joo Yuh, Daniel Shédid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Case Lessons · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHydrocephalusSurgerySubarachnoid hemorrhageAtlantoaxial instabilityVentriculostomyComplicationHematomaCervical spine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atlantoaxial sublaminar wiring has many known complications related to hardware failure, but intracranial hemorrhage is a rare complication. OBSERVATIONS: A 61-year-old female patient with prior atlantoaxial sublaminar wiring for odontoid fracture nonunion experienced decreased level of consciousness due to a subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage of the posterior fossa with intraventricular extension and hydrocephalus. Rupture of the sublaminar wire with intramedullary protrusion was the cause of the hemorrhage. The patient was treated with ventriculostomy for hydrocephalus and occipital cervical fusion for spinal instability, along with removal of the broken wire and drainage of a hematoma. LESSONS: This uncommon cause of intracranial hemorrhage highlights an additional risk of atlantoaxial sublaminar wiring compared with other atlantoaxial fusion techniques. In addition, this case suggests cervical instrumentation failure as a differential diagnosis of subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage of the posterior fossa when a history of prior instrumentation is known.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurosurgery Case LessonsSame topicSpinal Fractures and Fixation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207