MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3088132118 · doi:10.1097/gox.0000000000003061

Etiology of Craniofacial Bone Hyperpigmentation and an Algorithm for Addressing Intraoperative Discovery

2020· article· en· W3088132118 sur OpenAlexaff
David W. R. Chubb, James P. Finkemeyer, Kevin Bush

Notice bibliographique

RevuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueOsteomyelitis and Bone Disorders Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHyperpigmentationTetracyclineDermatologyEtiologyMalignancySurgeryPathologyBiologyAntibioticsGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Intraoperative discovery of previously undiagnosed calvarial bone hyperpigmentation, or “black bone,” is a relatively uncommon occurrence but can be a confounding encounter. The literature is sparse and limited to case reports.1 At the time of writing, the authors found only 6 reported cases dating back to 1962, 3 of which were autopsy findings.2 The most commonly reported cause of osseous hyperpigmentation is tetracycline use. At cumulative doses of 100 g or greater—as typically prescribed for acne vulgaris and other chronic conditions—the risk is 10% after 1 year and 40% after 4 years.3 The mechanism occurs during bone growth, in which tetracycline molecules chelate to calcium and are incorporated into actively mineralizing tissues forming a tetracycline-calcium orthophosphate complex.4 Osseous discoloration is a result of subsequent oxidization and deposition of various endogenous products of degradation. It has a predilection for well-vascularized areas. There are no reported radiological abnormalities attributed to tetracycline-related hyperpigmentation. Histologically, in adults, tetracycline appears to be innocuous.3 Despite tetracycline use being the most common underlying etiology, a number of additional uncommon and more sinister diagnoses must be excluded. Potential causes include congenital metabolic conditions, malignancy, infection, metallosis from implanted material,1 and additional medications such as some chemotherapeutic and antileprosy agents. Ochronosis, the skeletal manifestation of the autosomal recessive condition alkaptonuria, is a well-described but rare cause of bone hyperpigmentation. It is characterized by accumulation of polymerized homogentisic acid and may remain undiagnosed until adulthood. A family medical history or a personal history of early-onset large joint osteoarthritis or osteoporosis can aid in making the diagnosis which can be confirmed with a urinary homogentisic acid test. Other causes require a careful histological and radiological diagnosis. The illustrative case presented is of a 47-year-old patient who is undergoing facial feminization as part of a male-to-female gender transition. She is otherwise well with a medication history significant for multiple courses of tetracycline as an adolescent for treatment of acne vulgaris. A bicoronal exposure and a pericranial flap reconstruction were performed for brow recontouring—which revealed a striking hyperpigmentation of the frontal bones (Fig. 1). A preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging revealed normal bone structure (Fig. 2).Fig. 1.: Intraoperative photograph following bicoronal exposure and pericranial flap reconstruction for brow recontouring during a facial feminization procedure. The image demonstrates yellow and black-green bone discoloration. Only the right side has undergone recontouring with a mechanized burr at this point. The right frontal bone has been superficially burred, revealing a normal appearing bone at a relatively shallow level (area 1), whereas the right brow region has been extensively burred showing darker staining and increased depth of involvement (area 2).Fig. 2.: A sagittal view of a preoperative computed tomographic image demonstrating normal radiological appearance of the frontal bone and the remaining craniofacial skeleton.Intraoperatively, the bone was macroscopically normal beside the hyperpigmentation with expected integrity and resilience. Interestingly, the depth and degree of pigmentation were not uniform (Fig. 1). It has been shown that tetracyclines will preferentially involve areas of new bone formation.5 We hypothesized that the superficial involvement of the calvarial frontal bone stems from the appositional growth of adolescence where tetracycline was preferentially chelated in bone matrix at the outer surface of the calvaria. When encountered, hyperpigmented craniofacial bone requires a thorough investigation to find its cause. A detailed history and clinical examination are essential even if performed in a focused, retrospective fashion. A full medication history should be sought—in particular, the use, dose, and duration of tetracycline-class medications. Physical examination may reveal pigmentation of dentition or transmucosal discoloration of the mandibular or maxillary bone, highly suggestive of tetracycline use.3 However, a history of tetracycline use does not exclude other causes, particularly where pigmentation is focal. For instance, yellow fluorescence from localized tetracycline uptake has been noted in malignant bone tumors.2 We recommend an algorithm that includes both perioperative CT imaging and histological examination where a clear medication history is not elucidated or where focal pigmentation is present.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Étude de cas · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,027

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0050,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0230,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0040,010
Science ouverte0,0060,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0070,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,004

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,075
Tête enseignante GPT0,363
Écart entre enseignants0,288 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeÉtude de cas
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global OpenMême sujetOsteomyelitis and Bone Disorders ResearchTravaux en français237 207