MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416499993 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.14.027

INFLUENCE OF HIGH PELVIC INCIDENCE ON OPERATIVE DIFFICULTY IN PATIENTS TREATED SURGICALLY FOR DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SPONDYLOLISTHESIS

2025· article· en· W4416499993 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Cadieux, Jennifer Urquhart, Renan Fernandes, Andrew Glennie, Charles Fisher, Christopher S. Bailey, R.Y. Rampersaud

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecompressionBlood lossIncidence (geometry)DemographicsRetrospective cohort studyCohortProspective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to determine if the degree of pelvic incidence (PI) influenced the difficulty of surgery in patients undergoing treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis. This is a retrospective cohort study of patients enrolled between 2015 - 2021 in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) multi-centred prospective study on the assessment and management of DLS who underwent decompression or decompression and fusion, and who had baseline radiographic measures. Patients were divided into two groups based on a preoperative PI of >60° or < 6 0°. Baseline demographic, clinical, radiographic, and procedure factors were compared between the groups stratified by procedure type (decompression vs. decompression and fusion). Of the patients that had a decompression alone, 85 had PI 60°. Demographic factors, chief complaint, grade of spondylolisthesis, and preoperative patient-rated outcome measures (PROM) were similar between the two groups. Blood loss was similar in both groups, but patients with a high PI had significantly longer operative times (96 minutes vs. 82 minutes). Of the patients that had a decompression and fusion, 193 had PI 60°. Demographics and preoperative PROMs were similar between the groups except more females were in the high PI group (71% vs 60%). Patients in the high PI group were also more likely to have grade II spondylolisthesis (41% vs. 26%) and were less likely to have minimally invasive surgery (16% vs. 29%). Operating time was similar between groups; however, blood loss was significantly increased in the patients that had a high PI (M = 400 vs. 300 mL). Intraoperative complications and length of stay were not different between groups, regardless of procedure. Overall, this study demonstrates that high PI is associated with increased operative time and blood loss, indicating there may be unique challenges with this population. Technical difficulties may arise due to larger exposures required and challenging angles seen in patients with a high PI. Thus, operative difficulties should be anticipated when treating patients with a PI >60°.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207