ArticlePloS one2025
Spinal cord swelling and intradural compression predict neurological recovery after acute cervical traumatic spinal cord injury.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intradural spinal cord compression impairs perfusion pressure and is putatively rate-limiting for recovery after traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI). After cervical tSCI, even minimally improved tissue preservation may help promote neurological recovery. To assess the nature and extent of spinal cord swelling and compression post-acute cervical tSCI, we evaluated several baseline MRI parameters including BASIC score, intramedullary lesion (IML) length, maximal canal compromise (MCC), maximal spinal cord compression (MSCC), extent of cord compression (ECC), maximal swollen anteroposterior diameter adjacent to injury site (Dmax), and maximal cord swelling (MCS) in 169 consecutive patients across 2 centers. In patients with either primarily intradural or combined (MSCC ≤5% or >5%, respectively) cord compression, we examined the predictive value of clinical and imaging admission parameters on American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) severity and conversion up to 1-year follow-up. 37 (21.9%) patients presented with primarily intradural while 132 (78.1%) had combined cord compression. MSCC, MCS, and Dmax values differed significantly between the two groups (p < 0.0001, < 0.01 and < 0.001, respectively). MSCC was associated with age, MCC and MCS at baseline, while MCS was associated with age, MSCC and Dmax, on multivariable analysis. Logistic regression analysis of areas under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) confirmed ECC (AUC 0.678) and MCS (AUC 0.922) as good and excellent predictors, respectively of AIS-conversion at 1-year for intradural compression participants. Additionally, MCS was significantly more accurate in predicting AIS-conversion in intradural group and the probability of AIS-conversion significantly decreased with each 1% increase in MCS (p = 0.003; OR 0.949), for both compression subtypes. In conclusion, baseline measures of cord swelling predict AIS-conversion likelihood up to 1-year. The deleterious effects of intradural cord compression, either isolated or presenting with extradural compression, may benefit from supplemental decompression strategies in addition to current standard-of-care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.