Middle Cranial Fossa Arachnoid Cysts That Come and Go
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arachnoid cysts are relatively common lesions encountered in neurosurgical practice. While arachnoid cysts are most commonly observed to remain of fixed volume over time, little is actually known about their natural history and optimal method of treatment. We present 2 young children with middle fossa arachnoid cysts. In 1 child, the cyst enlarged over time, prompting neurosurgical intervention. However, in the other child, the cyst resolved spontaneously without intervention. The child whose cyst enlarged underwent cyst wall fenestration and cyst-peritoneal shunting. For the child whose arachnoid cyst disappeared without treatment, there was no history of trauma or antecedent headache. These 2 cases serve to illustrate in a single report that middle fossa arachnoid cysts can be dynamic in nature, with some growing in size while others spontaneously resolving. In both cases presented, the temporal lobe on the affected side was compressed by the large cyst. Following treatment or spontaneous resolution of the cyst, the temporal lobe reexpanded, suggesting a normal volume of temporal lobe, and not temporal lobe agenesis. In asymptomatic patients with moderate-sized arachnoid cysts such as the ones demonstrated in these case reports, we suggest close follow-up with serial imaging before deciding on a final treatment plan.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".