Site of Attachment of Inverted Papilloma Predicted by CT Findings of Osteitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of choice for sinonasal inverted papilloma (IP) is surgical resection, which typically includes identification of the site of origin with appropriate inclusion or management of this site in the surgical resection. Appropriate preoperative planning is thus of significant importance and will routinely include CT imaging and nasal endoscopy. The aim of this study was to determine whether findings of osteitis in the patients' preoperative CT images could predict the site of attachment. METHODS: This bipartite study contained both retrospective and prospective arms. For the retrospective arm, preoperative CT images of all cases were reviewed electronically in a blinded fashion by the senior author and a prediction was made for the site of attachment. The actual site of attachment as documented in the operative note was then compared with the predicted site. A similar process was followed for the prospectively acquired patients except that the site of attachment was predicted preoperatively. RESULTS: Twenty-eight retrospective and six prospective patients were identified as eligible for the study. Six retrospective patients were excluded because of incomplete data. In patients that were reviewed retrospectively, osteitis was seen in 20/22 patients and was used to correctly predict the site of attachment in 18/20 times. Of the prospectively acquired patients osteitis was seen in 5/6 patients with the site of attachment predicted in 4/5 patients. CONCLUSION: In patients in whom osteitis is detectable on the preoperative CT scan, the site of origin of the IP can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".