MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conservative management of vestibular schwannomas - second review of a prospective longitudinal study

2004· review· en· W2004629757 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Otolaryngology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalToronto General Hospital
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineConservative managementSchwannomaRadiation therapyVestibular systemSurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingRadiological weaponCerebellopontine angleProspective cohort studyRadiosurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.308 · 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