ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
An evaluation of individuals who repeatedly present with suspected cauda equina syndrome.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a surgical emergency and an intimidating medico-legal challenge. Poor clinical specificity leads to a high rate of negative (normal/No-CES) MRI scans, placing additional burden on emergency services. A proportion of patients re-present with CES-like symptoms. The aim of this study was to assess this cohort of patients and identify the incidence, clinical risk factors, comparative MRI-findings and predictive factors for subsequent True-CES.
methodsRetrospective review of prospective data of patients aged 18-65 years, who first attended with suspected-CES with a normal MRI, between January 2019-December 2022; and re-presented with suspected-CES within one year. Patients with True-CES or abnormal MRI pathology at first attendance were excluded. Clinical, bladder scan and MRI findings from first and re-presentation visits were recorded and statistically analysed.
results922 patients were included, 56 (6%) had True-CES on MRI and 356 met exclusion criteria, leaving 510 patients with normal MRI on initial presentation. 43 patients (8%) re-presented within one year (mean interval 152 days), and 7 presented a third time (mean interval 126 days). There was no significant difference in clinical symptoms, gender and bladder scans between presentations. No patient showed True-CES on re-presentation MRI, all demonstrating the same MRI findings as the initial scan.
conclusionThis is the largest series of patients that evaluates re-presentations of suspected-CES after initial attendance with normal/No-CES MRI. There were no significant clinical/radiological differences between presentations. No patient showed True-CES on re-presentation MRI, and therefore, no predictive factors were identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41436673What 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.