MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306780250 · doi:10.1007/s00586-022-07421-6

Incidence of postoperative symptomatic spinal epidural hematoma requiring surgical evacuation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4306780250 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Spine Journal · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Hematomas and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisIncidence (geometry)Funnel plotPublication biasSurgerySubgroup analysisNeurosurgeryCochrane LibraryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the incidence of symptomatic spinal epidural hematoma (SSEH) following spine surgery. METHODS: We systematically searched for all relevant articles that mentioned the incidence of SSEH following the spine surgery published in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through March 2022 and manually searched the reference lists of included studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was performed to calculate the pooled incidence of the totality and subgroups based on the heterogeneity. The potential publication bias was assessed by Egger's linear regression and a funnel plot. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 40 studies were included in our meta-analysis based on our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The overall pooled incidence of SSEH was 0.52% (95% CI 0.004-0.007). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled incidence of SSEH in males and females was 0.86% (95% CI 0.004-0.023) and 0.68% (95% CI 0.003-0.017). Among the different indications, a higher incidence (2.9%, 95% CI 0.006-0.084) was found in patients with deformity than degeneration (1.12%, 95% CI 0.006-0.020) and tumor (0.30%, 95% CI 0.006-0.084). For different surgical sites, the incidences of SSEH in cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine were 0.32% (95% CI 0.002-0.005), 0.84% (95% CI 0.004-0.017) and 0.63% (95% CI 0.004-0.010), respectively. The incidences of SSEH in anterior and posterior approach were 0.24% (95% CI 0.001-0.006) and 0.70% (95% CI 0.004-0.011), respectively. The pooled incidence of SSEH was five times higher with minimally invasive surgery (1.94%, 95% CI 0.009-0.043) than with open surgery (0.42%, 95% CI 0.003-0.006). Delayed onset of SSEH had a lower incidence of 0.16% (95% CI 0.001-0.002) than early onset. There were no significant variations in the incidence of SSEH between patients who received perioperative anticoagulation therapy and those who did not or did not report getting chemopreventive therapy (0.44%, 95% CI 0.006-0.084 versus 0.42%, 95% CI 0.003-0.006). CONCLUSION: We evaluated the overall incidence proportion of SSEH after spine surgery and performed stratified analysis, including sex, surgical indication, site, approach, minimally invasive surgery, and delayed onset of SSEH. Our research would be helpful for patients to be accurately informed of their risk and for spinal surgeons to estimate the probability of SSEH after spine surgery.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.265 · 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