Endoscopic endonasal transpterygoid approaches: Anatomical landmarks for planning the surgical corridor
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Endoscopic endonasal transpterygoid approaches (EETA) use the pneumatization of the sinonasal corridor to control lesions of the middle and posterior skull base. These surgical areas are complex and the required surgical corridors are difficult to predict. AIM: Define anatomical landmarks for the preoperative planning of EETAs. STUDY DESIGN: Anatomical study. METHODS: We reviewed images from high-resolution maxillofacial CT scans with (0.6-mm axial slice acquisition). Cephalometric measurements were obtained using Kodak Carestream Image Software (Rochester, NY). RESULTS: Average distance from midline to the vidian canal was 12.78 mm (range 9.4-15.8 mm). Average horizontal distance from the vidian canal to the foramen rotundum was 5.6 mm (range 2.8-11.5 mm). Average vertical distance from the vidian canal to the foramen rotundum was 6.22 mm (range 4.3-9.3 mm). These landmarks are consequential during the preoperative planning of the surgical corridor. To facilitate communication, we classified EETAs as: A) Partial removal of the pterygoid plates (transposition of temporo-parietal fascia); B) removal of anteromedial aspect of the pterygoid process (lesions involving the lateral recess of the sphenoid sinus); C) involves dissecting the vidian nerve to control the petrous ICA and removing the pterygoid plates base to reach the petrous apex, Meckel's cave, or cavernous sinus; D) variable removal of the pterygoid plates to access the infratemporal fossa; and E) removal of pterygoid process and medial third of the Eustachian tube to expose the nasopharynx. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel classification and landmarks system helps to understand the anatomy of this complex area and to accurately plan the EETA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it