An Incidence of Anteroinferior Cerebellar Artery/Posteroinferior Cerebellar Artery Anatomic Variants Penetrating the Subarcuate Fossa Dura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This case series reports an incidence of anomalous vascular anatomy within the cerebellopontine angle. The relevant literature effectively describes techniques for mobilization yet underestimates the incidence. There has been no literature on the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to preoperatively identify this anatomic variant. METHODS: We identify 8 cases of anomalous vascular anatomy within the cerebellopontine angle over a period of 6 years. They were uniformly identified through a retrosigmoid approach. Retrospective review of available 3-dimensional fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition (3D-FIESTA) sequences was performed. Intraoperative video capture of technique for mobilization was obtained. Institutional neurosurgical database review identified retrosigmoid craniotomies performed by the senior surgeon. RESULTS: We identify 8 of 192 cases (4.2%) as having this anomalous vascular anatomy. This aberrant vascular loop resulted in subtotal resection in 3 of 8 cases (37.5%) and significant morbidity in 1 of 8 cases (12.5%). The retrospective review of the 3D-FIESTA MRI sequences positively identified this aberrant vascular course in 5 of 5 cases (100%). The digital video recording is of high quality and demonstrates proper technique for mobilization. CONCLUSION: The presence of this vessel creates the potential for technical difficulty and significant complications. We report the incidence and techniques of mobilization. This variant can potentially be identified on preoperative 3D-FIESTA MRI sequences. Knowledge of this anatomy may guide neurosurgeons in their case preparation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".