Conservative management of vestibular schwannomas - second review of a prospective longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vestibular schwannomas have been traditionally managed with microsurgical removal and in recent years, stereotactic radiotherapy. However, there is a group of patients in whom a conservative management approach might represent a desirable alternative. The aim of this study was to determine the natural history and outcome following the conservative management of 72 patients with unilateral vestibular schwannomas. This is a prospective cohort review of a previously published group of patients [Clin. Otolaryngol. (2000) 25, 28-39] with unilateral vestibular schwannoma that were initially analysed at our institution in 1998 [Walsh R.M., Bath A.P., Bance M.L. et al., Clin. Otolaryngol. (2000) 25, 28]. The mean duration of follow-up was 80 months (range 52-242 months). All the patients in the study underwent serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for assessment of tumour growth. Patients were deemed to have failed conservative management if there was evidence of rapid radiological tumour growth and/or increasing signs and symptoms, which necessitated active intervention. The mean tumour growth rate for the entire group at the second review was 1 mm/year (range -0.84-9.65 mm/year). The mean growth rate for cerebellopontine angle tumours (1.3 mm/year) was significantly greater than that of internal auditory canal (IAC) tumours (0 mm/year) (P = 0.005). The majority of tumours (87.14%) grew <2 mm/year. There was significant tumour growth seen in 38.9%, no or insignificant growth in 41.7%, and negative growth in 19.4%. Twenty-three patients (32%) failed conservative management at the second review. There was no difference in the outcome of these failed patients in comparison with patients who underwent primary treatment without a period of conservative management. The mean growth rate of tumours in patients that failed conservative management (3.1 mm/year) was significantly greater than that in patients who did not fail (0.2 mm/year) (P < 0.001). No factors predictive of tumour growth or failure of conservative management were identified. Hearing deterioration with pure tone averages (0.5, 1, 2, 3 kHz) and speech discrimination scores occurred irrespective of tumour growth. This prospective study further emphasizes the role of conservative management in selected cases of vestibular schwannomas. Tumours in this study confined to the IAC typically demonstrated minimal or no growth on serial MRI scanning. Regular follow-up with interval scanning is mandatory in all patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".