Successful use of electrosurgery in an occipitocervical fusion procedure in a patient with an established cochlear implant: illustrative case
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurotechnology is rapidly evolving, challenging surgeons to expand their expertise in managing patients with implanted devices. More than 700,000 persons use cochlear implants. Many others have implanted pacemakers and neuromodulation devices. Understanding electrosurgical interactions is critical for patient safety, yet the literature on this remains limited. Conventional electrosurgery, which uses high-frequency alternating current for hemostasis, is contraindicated in cochlear implant users due to the risk of electromagnetic interference (EMI). EMI can cause heating, component malfunction, or device failure. Despite shielding, induction currents and voltage surges may exceed device tolerance, posing risks. OBSERVATIONS: While PlasmaBlade safety is documented in cardiac surgery, its use in neurosurgery is underreported. The authors present a case demonstrating its safe application during an occipitocervical fusion in a 17-year-old with an established cochlear implant. The PlasmaBlade enabled exposure without affecting implant integrity or auditory function. LESSONS: As neurotechnology becomes increasingly prevalent, using innovative safety strategies, including monitoring electromagnetic fields, and adopting refined technologies like the PlasmaBlade will be impactful. These advancements have the potential to improve patient outcomes and ensure safer care for individuals with implanted devices. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE25167.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it