MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980327269 · doi:10.1002/lary.20769

Septoplasty retards midfacial growth in a rabbit model

2010· article· en· W1980327269 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Wong, S V Filatov, Douglas J. Kibblewhite

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNasal Surgery and Airway Studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeptoplastyMedicineRhinoplastyCartilageSurgeryImplantNoseAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Septoplasty in the prepubertal age group is a controversial operation because of concerns regarding retardation of subsequent midfacial growth. This study uses a validated rabbit snout model to determine if septoplasty results in midfacial growth retardation, and if the retardation can be averted by replacing resected cartilage with a porous polyethylene implant. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective controlled animal study. METHODS: Sixteen 9-week-old New Zealand white rabbits were divided into four groups: two control and two experimental. The experimental groups both underwent conservative submucoperichondrial surgical excision of a portion of their septum, leaving a generous dorsal and caudal septal strut for nasal support similar to what would be done clinically in humans. One of the experimental groups had replacement of the resected area by a rigid porous polyethylene graft, and in the other experimental group the resected area was left empty. Cephalometric measurements were performed on radiographs taken at the time of implantation, and at sacrifice when the rabbits were mature at 24 weeks of age. RESULTS: There were significant disturbances in snout growth between experimental and control groups, and no significant differences between the two experimental groups or between the two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate midfacial growth retardation after conservative septoplasty in young rabbits, and that this retardation could not be averted by replacing the resected cartilage with a porous polyethylene graft. These data are in agreement with human studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LaryngoscopeSame topicNasal Surgery and Airway StudiesFrench-language works237,207