MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399578642 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000005072

The Fate of The Broken Tether

2024· article· en· W4399578642 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler A. Tetreault, Tiffany N. Phan, Tishya A.L. Wren, Michael J. Heffernan, Michelle C. Welborn, John T. Smith, Ron El‐Hawary, Kmc Cheung, Kenneth D. Illingworth, David L. Skaggs

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreakageIdiopathic scoliosisSurgeryRadiographyNuclear medicineScoliosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess curve progression and occurrence of revision surgery following tether breakage after vertebral body tethering (VBT). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Tether breakage after VBT is common with rates up to 50% reported. In these cases, it remains unknown whether the curve will progress or remain stable. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adolescent and juvenile idiopathic scoliosis patients in a multicenter registry with ≥2-year-follow-up after VBT were reviewed. Broken tethers were listed as postoperative complications and identified by increased screw divergence of >5 degrees on serial radiographs. Revision procedures and curve magnitude at subsequent visits were recorded. RESULTS: Of 186 patients who qualified for inclusion, 84 (45.2%) patients with tether breakage were identified with a mean age at VBT of 12.4±1.4 years and mean curve magnitude at index procedure of 51.8±8.1 degrees. Tether breakage occurred at a mean of 30.3±11.8 months and mean curve of 33.9±13.2 degrees. Twelve patients (12/84, 14.5%) underwent 13 revision procedures after tether breakage, including six tether revisions and seven conversions to fusion. All tether revisions occurred within 5 months of breakage identification. No patients with curves <35 degrees after breakage underwent revision. Revision rate was greatest in skeletally immature (Risser 0-3) patients with curves ≥35 degrees at time of breakage (Risser 0-3: 9/17, 53% vs. Risser 4-5: 3/23, 13%, P =0.01). Curves increased by 3.1 and 3.7 degrees in the first and second year, respectively. By 2 years, 15/30 (50%) progressed >5 degrees and 8/30 (26.7%) progressed >10 degrees. Overall, 66.7% (40/60) reached a curve magnitude >35 degrees at their latest follow-up, and 14/60 (23.3%) reached a curve magnitude >45 degrees. Skeletal maturity did not affect curve progression after tether breakage ( P >0.26), but time to rupture did ( P =0.048). CONCLUSIONS: While skeletal immaturity and curve magnitude were not independently associated with curve progression, skeletally immature patients with curves ≥35 degrees at time of rupture are most likely to undergo additional surgery. Most patients can expect progression at least 5 degrees in the first 2 years after tether breakage, though longer term behavior remains unknown. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207