MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310179086 · doi:10.1002/hon.3102

The role of Vertebral Augmentation Procedures in the management of vertebral compression fractures secondary to multiple myeloma

2022· review· en· W4310179086 on OpenAlexaff
Kelechi Eseonu, Jaykar R. Panchmatia, Matthew Streetly, Jonathan N. Grauer, Bahram Fakouri

Bibliographic record

VenueHematological Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKyphosisVertebral bodyBone cementVertebral compression fracturePercutaneous vertebroplastyBalloonSurgeryPercutaneousRadiologyRadiographyCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a systemic disorder characterised by proliferation of B-lymphocytes and plasma cells in the bone marrow. The primary aims of the management of spinal lesions in MM are pain control and fracture stabilisation. Vertebral augmentation procedures (VAP) can be subdivided into percutaneous vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP). BKP involves the placement of orthopaedic balloons into the fractured vertebral body, creating a void into which polymethylmethacrylate bone cement is injected. This review outlines the management of spinal lesions in patients with MM, with a focus on the comparative risks and efficacy of vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP). Soft tissue masses in MM are highly radiosensitive. Bisphosphonates and newer oncological therapies have decreased the indications for palliative radiotherapy, while spinal bracing can be utilised in selected cases to provide stability. BKP and VP provide equivalent long term pain control after MM vertebral compression fractures (VCF). BKP is superior to non-operative management and VP for restoration of vertebral body height and prevention of segmental kyphosis. Current evidence suggests a greater degree of correction of kyphotic deformity and restoration of mid vertebral height (MVH) with BKP when compared with VP. The literature supports the use of BKP even in the presence of posterior vertebral body wall (PVBW) fractures, a group previously considered a contraindication to VAP. Superior functional outcomes have been reported in patients undergoing early versus delayed BKP (<6-8 weeks). Current evidence supports a lower risk of cement extrusion with BKP than with VP, but serious complications following VAP are rare. MM spinal pathology should be managed in a multidisciplinary setting. Surgical decompression and instrumentation are rarely indicated, due to the radio-sensitivity of soft tissue lesions in MM. BKP is a safe and effective procedure for VCF secondary to MM.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.344 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematological OncologySame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207