MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063411719 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100003139

Distal Mycotic Aneurysm of the AICA Mimicking Intracanalicular Acoustic Neuroma

2003· review· en· W2063411719 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Salvatore DiMaio, Gérard Mohr, Jean-Jacques Dufour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMeningioma and schwannoma management
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnterior inferior cerebellar arteryAneurysmCerebellopontine angleFusiform AneurysmAcoustic neuromaPresentation (obstetrics)PseudoaneurysmRadiologyEtiologyMycotic aneurysmThrombusAnatomySurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Among cases of cerebellopontine angle lesions, vascular lesions involving the internal auditory canal are extremely rare. We report a distal fusiform mycotic pseudoaneurysm of the anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) that simulated an acoustic neuroma on presentation. METHODS: A 60-year-old woman was investigated for recent onset of acute dizziness. Laboratory and radiographic investigations are presented, as well as the surgical management of the patient and pathological examination of the aneurysm. CONCLUSIONS: An exceptionally rare case of distal mycotic intracanalicular pseudoaneurysm of the AICA with intraluminal thrombus and fusiform anatomy is described. In our review of the literature (1966-present), only five other intracanalicular AICA-aneurysms were encountered, none of which were infectious in etiology. The possible pathophysiologic mechanisms of distal AICA-aneurysms are discussed along with the currently available literature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicMeningioma and schwannoma managementFrench-language works237,207