MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Transcrusal Approach

2010· article· en· W2009065174 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Brandt, Justin Poirier, Brian Hughes, Stephen Lownie, Lorne S. Parnes

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryFacial nerveHydrocephalusPalsyVertigoCranial nervesBasilar arteryTranslabyrinthine approachCerebellopontine angleSchwannomaRadiologyMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief OBJECTIVE This study reviewed the experience and outcomes of 1 surgical team (L.S.P., S.P.L.) using the transcrusal approach. METHODS Ten-year retrospective review of 17 consecutive patients requiring transcrusal exposure of the petrous apex and upper brainstem was performed. The main outcome measures included hearing and facial nerve preservation as measured by standard audiography and postoperative assessment using the House-Brackmann scale. RESULTS Operative indications included meningioma (5 patients), epidermoid/dermoid cyst (3 patients), trigeminal schwannoma (3 patients), giant or large upper basilar artery aneurysm (3 patients), pontine cavernoma (1 patient), chondrosarcoma (1 patient), and clival melanocytoma (1 patient). Average tumor size was 3.6 cm. Complete resection was achieved in 50% of patients with petroclival tumors. Follow-up data were obtained for 14 patients at 20 ± 4 months. Serviceable hearing was preserved in 58%. Sixty-four percent of patients demonstrated House-Brackmann stage I facial nerve function. Two patients died perioperatively (brainstem infarction). Two patients became hemiparetic, with 1 improving substantially. CSF leaks developed in 3 patients. Forty-seven percent of patients demonstrated cranial nerve V deficits. Forty-one percent of patients demonstrated deficits of cranial nerve III, IV, or VI. Vertigo, vestibular disturbance, hydrocephalus, temporal lobe contusion, or hematoma did not develop in any patients. CONCLUSION The transcrusal approach provides adequate exposure for most petroclival lesions and giant aneurysms of the upper basilar artery while offering the possibility of hearing preservation. Like all approaches to large tumors and aneurysms in this region, there is a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. However, this approach is an excellent alternative to other techniques that necessitate deliberate sacrifice of ipsilateral hearing. OBJECTIVE: This study reviewed the experience and outcomes of one surgical team using the transcrusal approach. METHODS: A ten-year retrospective review of 17 consecutive patients requiring transcrusal exposure of the petrous apex and upper brainstem was performed. The main outcome measures included hearing and facial nerve preservation measured by standard audiography and postoperative assessment using the House-Brackmann scale. RESULTS: Operative indications included meningioma, epidermoid/dermoid cyst, trigeminal schwannoma, giant or large upper basilar artery aneurysm, pontine cavernoma, chondrosarcoma, and clival melanocytoma. Average tumor size was 3.6 cm. Complete resection was achieved in 50% of patients with petroclival tumors. Follow-up data were obtained for 14 patients at 20 [±] 4 months. Serviceable hearing was preserved in 58%. Sixty-four percent of patients demonstrated House-Brackmann stage I facial nerve function. Two patients died perioperatively (brainstem infarction). Two patients became hemiparetic, with 1 improving substantially. CSF leaks developed in 3 patients. Forty-seven percent of patients had cranial nerve V deficits. Forty-one percent of patients had deficits of cranial nerve III, IV, or VI. CONCLUSION: The transcrusal approach provides adequate exposure for most petroclival lesions and giant aneurysms of the upper basilar artery and offers the possibility of hearing preservation. While there is potential risk, the approach to an excellent alternative is technique that acquires deliberate sacrifice of ipsilateral hearing.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207