“Ultralow-dose” CT Without Sedation in Pediatric Patients With Neuromuscular Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with neuromuscular scoliosis undergoing scoliosis surgery face substantial rates of complications. To mitigate surgical risks such as blood loss in pediatric patients with neuromuscular scoliosis, this study focuses on enabling instrumentation planning for their abnormal vertebral and pelvic anatomy and osteopenia. This study assessed the feasibility of an "ultralow-dose" CT (ULD CT) protocol without sedation in pediatric patients with neuromuscular scoliosis who often have comorbid movement disorders. Our prospective quality improvement study aims: (1) to determine if ULD CT without sedation is feasible in this patient group; (2) to quantify the radiation dose from ULD CT and compare it with preoperative spine radiographs (XR); and (3) to assess if ULD CT allows accurate anatomical assessment and intraoperative navigation given the prevalence of movement disorders. METHODS: Children with neuromuscular scoliosis underwent spine XR and ULD CT scans. Chart reviews assessed disease etiology and comorbidities. Radiation dose was quantified through Monte-Carlo simulations giving dose indices and effective dose, with statistical analysis done using a paired student's t -test (α=0.05). CT image quality was assessed for its use in preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (5 males, 9 females, average age 14±3 y) participated. One patient needed sedation due to autism spectrum disorder and global developmental delay. The radiation dose for spine XR was 0.5±0.2 mSv, and ULD CT was 0.6±0.1 mSv. There was no statistically significant difference in radiation doses between methods. All ULD CT scans had adequate quality for preoperative assessment of pedicle diameter and orientation, obstacles impeding pedicle entry, S2 Alar-Iliac screw orientation, and intraoperative navigation. CONCLUSIONS: ULD CT without sedation is feasible for children with neuromuscular scoliosis. Radiation doses were comparable to standard radiographs. ULD CT provided accurate anatomical assessments and supported intraoperative navigation, proving beneficial despite movement disorders in these patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2-Development of diagnostic criteria on basis of consecutive patients (with universally applied reference widely accepted standard).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".