A Dorsal Approach for the Removal of the Nasal Septum in the Horse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate a technique involving a dorsal approach for the removal of the nasal septum in adult horses. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. ANIMALS: Four client-owned horses. METHODS: Access for partial nasal septum resection was through a dorsal nasal bone flap. Septum resection was performed because of reduced airflow from septal deviation and/or thickening caused by traumatic insult or neoplasia. Preoperative clinical signs and diagnostic results were recorded. Intra- and postoperative complications were noted and follow-up information was obtained from telephone interviews of owners or by clinical examination. RESULTS: The abnormal segment of the nasal septum was completely removed in all horses. A dorsal nasal bone flap approach provided excellent access to the septum and allowed immediate control of hemorrhage; blood transfusion was not needed. Cosmetic results were considered good to excellent by owners and horses returned to their previous level of work without perceived limitations associated with airway function. CONCLUSIONS: Nasal septum resection by the dorsal approach permits good observation of the abnormal septum, and provides exposure that facilitates removal of nasal masses and reduction of depression fractures with minimal complications. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A dorsal nasal bone flap approach should be considered for horses that require nasal septum resection because it can be achieved with minimal hemorrhage, good cosmetic results, and return to function.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".