Endoscopic Surgery for Juvenile Angiofibroma: A Critical Review of Indications after 46 Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: At present, transnasal endoscopic surgery is considered a viable option in the management of small-intermediate size juvenile angiofibromas (JAs). The authors critically review their 14-year experience in the management of this lesion to refine selection criteria for an endoscopic approach. METHODS: From January 1994 to May 2008, 46 patients were treated by a pure endoscopic resection after vascular embolization (87%). The lesions were classified according to Andrews (Andrews JC, et al., The surgical management of extensive nasopharyngeal angiofibromas with the infratemporal fossa approach, Laryngoscope 99:429-437, 1989) and Onerci (Onerci M, et al. Juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma: A revised staging system, Rhinology 44:39-45, 2006) staging systems. All patients were followed by regular endoscopic and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations. RESULTS: Lesions were classified as follows: stage I, n = 5; stage II, n = 24; stage IIIa, n = 14; stage IIIb, n = 3 according to Andrews classification system; stage 1, n = 9; stage II, n = 12; stage III, n = 26 according to Onerci's system. Unilateral blood supply was detected in 39 (85%) cases. Feeding vessels from the internal carotid artery (ICA) were also reported in 14 (30%) patients. Intraoperative blood loss ranged from 250 to 1300 mL (mean, 580 mL). In four (8.7%) cases, suspicious residual disease was detected by MRI. In one patient, a 1-cm persistent lesion was endoscopically removed because septoplasty was required and a slight increase in size was noticed. The other three lesions, all located in the root of the pterygoid plate, are nearly stable in size and are currently under MRI follow-up. CONCLUSION: The improvement of surgical instrumentation and the experience acquired during a 14-year period have contributed to expanding the indications for endoscopic surgery in the management of JAs. Even stage III lesions may be successfully managed, unless the ICA is encased or if it provides an extensive blood supply. An external approach may be required when critical structures such as the ICA, cavernous sinus, or optic nerve are involved by lesions that are persistent after previous treatment; such a situation may prevent safe and radical dissection with a pure endoscopic approach. Better understanding of the factors influencing the growth of residual lesions is needed to differentiate those requiring re-treatment from those which can be simply observed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".