MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399549815 · doi:10.21037/jss-23-135

Anterior cervical hybrid constructs reduce superior adjacent segment burden compared to multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion

2024· article· en· W4399549815 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fenil R. Bhatt, Lindsay Orosz, Kirsten A Schuler, Brandon J. Allen, Rita Roy, Julia Grigorian, Thomas C. Schuler, Christopher R. Good, Ehsan Jazini, Colin M. Haines

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Spine Surgery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Spine Society
KeywordsAnterior cervical discectomy and fusionFusionDiscectomyDiskectomyCervical vertebraeCervical spineMedicineComputer scienceSurgeryLumbarLumbar vertebrae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Traditional surgical treatment for symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease is anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), yet the increased risk of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) requiring additional surgery exists and may result in limiting long-term surgical success when it occurs. Disc arthroplasty can preserve or restore physiologic range of motion (ROM), decreasing adjacent level stress and subsequent surgery. For patients with multilevel pathology requiring at least a 1-level fusion, interest is growing in anterior cervical hybrid (ACH) surgery as a partial motion-preserving procedure to decrease the adjacent level burden. This radiographic study compares postoperative superior adjacent segment motion between ACH and ACDF. Secondarily, total global motion, construct motion, inferior adjacent segment motion, and sagittal alignment parameters were compared. Methods: This is a single-center, multi-surgeon, retrospective cohort study of 2- and 3-level ACH and ACDF cases between 2013 and 2021. Degrees of motion were analyzed on flexion/extension views using Cobb angles to measure global (C2-C7) construct and adjacent segment lordosis. Neutral lateral X-rays were analyzed for alignment parameters, including global lordosis, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), and T1 slope (T1S). Differences were determined by independent t-test and Fisher's exact test. Results: Of 100 patients, 38% were 2-level cases (47% ACH, 53% ACDF) and 62% were 3-level cases: (52% ACH, 48% ACDF). Postoperatively, superior adjacent segment motion increased with ACDF and decreased with ACH (-1.3°±5.3° ACH, 1.6°±4.6° ACDF, P=0.005). Postoperatively, the ACH group had greater ROM across the construct (16.3°±8.7° ACH, 4.7°±3.3° ACDF, P<0.001) and total global ROM (38.0°±12.8° ACH, 28.0°±11.1° ACDF, P<0.001). ACH resulted in a significant reduction of motion loss across the construct (-10.0°±11.7° ACH, -18.1°±10.8° ACDF, P<0.001). Postoperative alignment restoration was similar between both cohorts (-2.61°±8.36° ACH, 0.04°±12.24° ACDF, P=0.21). Conclusions: Compared to ACDF, hybrid constructs partially preserved motion across operative levels and had greater postoperative global ROM without increasing superior adjacent segment mobility or sacrificing alignment restoration. This supports the consideration of ACH in patients with multilevel degenerative cervical pathology requiring at least a 1-level fusion and suggests a propensity for long-term success by reducing the superior adjacent segment burden.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Spine SurgerySame topicCervical and Thoracic MyelopathyFrench-language works237,207