Exploring predictors of surgery and comparing operative treatment approaches for pediatric intracranial arachnoid cysts: a case series of 83 patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECT: Although intracranial arachnoid cysts are a common incidental finding on pediatric brain imaging, only a subset of patients require surgery for them. For the minority who undergo surgery, the comparative effectiveness of various surgical approaches is debated. The authors explored predictors of surgery and compared operative techniques for pediatric patients with an intracranial arachnoid cyst seen at a tertiary care center. METHODS: The authors reviewed records of pediatric patients with an intracranial arachnoid cyst. For each patient, data on baseline characteristics, the method of intervention, and surgical outcomes for the initial surgery were extracted, and cyst size at diagnosis was calculated (anteroposterior × craniocaudal × mediolateral). Baseline variables were analyzed as predictors of surgery by using logistic regression modeling, excluding patients whose surgery was not related to cyst size (i.e., those with obstructive hydrocephalus secondary to the cyst compressing a narrow CSF flow pathway or cyst rupture/hemorrhage). Data collected regarding surgical outcomes were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Among 83 pediatric patients with an intracranial arachnoid cyst seen over a 25-year period (1989-2013), 27 (33%) underwent surgery; all had at least 1 cyst-attributed symptom/finding. In the multivariate model, age at presentation and cyst size at diagnosis were independent predictors of surgery. Cyst size had greater predictive value; specifically, the area under the curve for the receiver-operating-characteristic curve was 0.89 (95% CI 0.82-0.97), with an ideal cutoff point of ≥ 68 cm(3). This cutoff point had 100% sensitivity (95% CI 79%-100%), 75% specificity (95% CI 61%-85%), a 53% positive predictive value (95% CI 36%-70%), and a 100% negative predictive value (95% CI 91%-100%); the positive likelihood ratio was 4.0 (95% CI 2.5-6.3), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0 (95% CI 0-0.3). Although the multivariate model excluded 7 patients who underwent surgery (based on prespecified criteria), excluding these 7 cases did not change the overall findings, as shown in a sensitivity analysis that included all the cases. Descriptive results regarding surgical outcomes did not indicate any salient differences among the surgical techniques (endoscopic fenestration, cystoperitoneal shunting, or craniotomy-based procedures) in terms of symptom resolution within 6 months, need for reoperation to date, cyst-size change from before the operation, morbidity, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these exploratory analyses suggest that pediatric patients with an intracranial arachnoid cyst are more likely to undergo surgery if the cyst is large, compresses a narrow CSF flow pathway to cause hydrocephalus, or has ruptured/hemorrhaged. There were no salient differences among the 3 surgical techniques for several clinically important outcomes. A prospective multicenter study is required to enable more robust analyses, which could ultimately provide a decision-making framework for surgical indications and clarify any differences in the comparative effectiveness of surgical approaches to treating pediatric intracranial arachnoid cysts.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».