How Does Spino-Pelvic Fixation Affect Post-Operative Compensatory Mechanisms in Adult Spinal Deformity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Design Retrospective single-center multi-surgeon cohort study. Objectives Compare the post-operative changes in the compensatory mechanisms of the sagittal balance according to the type of pelvic fixation: S2-Alar-iliac screws (S2AI) vs iliac screws (IS) in patients with Adult spine deformity (ASD). Methods ASD patients who underwent spino-pelvic fixation and remained with a PI-LL >10° mismatch post-operatively were included. Pre-operative and 1-year-follow-up PI, Lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), thoracic kyphosis (TK), femur obliquity angle (FOA), knee flexion angle (KFA) and ankle flexion angle (AFA) were analyzed on EOS imaging. Patients were categorized based on their pelvic fixation type (S2AI vs IS), and the pre-operative to 1-year-post-operative changes (ΔX°) in the compensatory mechanisms were compared between groups. Results Patients with S2AI ( n = 53) and those with IS ( n = 26) screws were comparable at baseline. ΔSS averaged 9.87° in the S2AI compared to 13.2° in the IS ( P = .001), whereas the ΔKFA reached 6.01° in the S2AI as opposed to 3.06° in the IS ( P = .02). The ΔPT was comparable between both groups (6.35°[S2AI group] vs 5.21°[ISgroup], P = .42). ΔTK, ΔLL, ΔFOA and ΔAFA were comparable between both groups. Conclusion The type of pelvic fixation impacts significantly the post-operative compensatory mechanisms in patients with ASD. Patients with S2AI screws are more likely to compensate their remaining post-operative PI-LL mismatch through their knees and less likely through their pelvis compared to patients with IS, despite similar changes in PT. This could be explained by an increased SI joint laxity in ASD patient and the lower resistance of the iliac connectors to the junctional mechanical stresses, allowing for sacro-iliac joint motion in patients with IS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".