Surgical Treatment of an Intracranial Epidermoid Cyst in a Dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report challenges and complications associated with surgical intracranial epidermoid cyst removal from the fourth ventricle of a dog. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical report. ANIMAL: Labrador retriever (7 years old) with focal seizures. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed an oval lesion in the fourth ventricle. This lesion was heterogeneously hyperintense on T2-weighted and fluid attenuation inversion recovery (FLAIR) images and hypointense on T1-weighted images. Dilatation of the ventricular system was present. A ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) was placed and the fourth ventricle was approached by suboccipital craniectomy. An oval, white mass was identified in the fourth ventricle. Subtotal removal of the mass was performed. RESULTS: On the day after surgery, neurologic deterioration was observed. The dog had severe cerebellar and brainstem dysfunction. Histopathologic examination of the removed tissue revealed an epidermoid cyst. The dog experienced gradual neurologic improvement; however, neurologic deterioration beginning at 6 months resulted in euthanasia 8 months after surgery. On necropsy, epidermoid cyst tissue was identified in the fourth ventricle. CONCLUSION: Surgical removal of an intracranial epidermoid cyst may be complicated by adhesions between the cyst capsule and surrounding neurovascular structures, causing postoperative morbidity and eventual recurrence of clinical signs. These observations should be taken into account when considering surgical removal of an intracranial epidermoid cyst.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".