Percutaneous treatment of facial venous malformations: A matched comparison of alcohol and bleomycin sclerotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Venous malformations (VMs) are common vascular anomalies; 40% are found in the head and neck. Percutaneous sclerotherapy is 1 treatment of choice. METHODS: In all, 17 patients with facial VMs were treated by percutaneous sclerotherapy using alcohol and individually matched to lesions treated with bleomycin. Treatment details and outcomes were compared. The average numbers of sessions were 1.7 for alcohol and 3.4 for bleomycin. Average dose administered was 8.1 cm³ alcohol and 9.1 units bleomycin. RESULTS: Of those treated with alcohol, 2 developed adverse effects and 7 developed complications. None treated with bleomycin developed adverse effects or complications. All patients treated with alcohol improved clinically. In all, 15 patients treated with bleomycin improved after treatment and 2 were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol has a slightly higher success rate and requires fewer treatment sessions. Bleomycin has a lower complication rate and less postprocedural swelling. Bleomycin treatment may be better tolerated and is thus preferred over alcohol sclerotherapy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".