A Posterior Tibial Nerve Neurilemoma Unrecognized for 10 Years: Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND IMPORTANCE: Neoplasms of peripheral nerves can be obscured, especially during the early phase. The author reports a patient with a posterior tibial nerve neurilemoma (schwannoma). For a decade, the tumor was misdiagnosed as nonspecific S1 radiculopathy and psychogenic chronic pain syndrome. The patient's presentation and initial management are unique. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: A 40-year-old woman reported severe left foot and calf pain, numbness, and weakness. The symptoms were evident during three pregnancies, and they gradually progressed. The neuropathic pain was protracted, despite implantation of a dorsal column stimulator and administration of a wide variety of medications and therapies. The symptoms were unresponsive to both inpatient and outpatient treatments, which resulted in a misdiagnosis of psychogenic pain for more than a decade. Diagnostic scans obtained by computed tomography, ultrasonography, and nuclear scintigraphy confirmed a popliteal fossa mass. INTERVENTION: A high, large posterior tibial nerve neurilemoma was found intraoperatively, positioned just below the sciatic nerve bifurcation with extensive degenerative features and hemorrhages. Surgical resection provided immediate recovery. CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve tumors are rarely acknowledged clinical entities. Chronic unexplained foot and calf pain and a positive Tinel's sign should raise suspicion of posterior tibial nerve neurilemoma. Even in patients who have had such tumors for a decade, surgical resection remains the treatment of choice.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".