Postoperative Infection After Duraplasty With Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene Sheet.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dural reconstruction is a significant problem in many cases of decompressive craniotomy and dural defect. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) sheet have been used as a dura mater substitute for duraplasty. The outcomes of 83 consecutive patients at our institution were reviewed who underwent external decompression and closure with the ePTFE sheet between August 1995 and December 2000. Eight cases of infection occurred. Seven patients had infection with subdural empyema after cranioplasty with autologous bone. Three patients improved after removal of only the infected bone. One patient improved after removal of the infected bone and ePTFE sheet. One patient experienced wound infection after the original operation. Four patients subsequently developed local and severe inflammation with skin erythema until the ePTFE sheet was removed. Four patients had severe recurrent infections which required subsequent therapy such as vascularized free rectus abdominis muscle flap transfer. Duraplasty with ePTFE sheet might promote infection and poor circulation in the skin flap. The ePTFE sheet should be removed at an early stage in a patient with infection.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".